By James M. Rochford

Ezekiel’s name means “God strengthens.”^[1] His book is one of the most chronological in the entire Bible, which makes it easier to study.[2] He was from a priestly family, and he was called to be a prophet at about the age of 30 in ~593 BC (Ezek. 1:1). He gave his last oracle in the 27^th year of King Jehoichin (Ezek. 29:17), which gave him a 23 year ministry.

Nebuchadnezzar took him as a hostage and slave after he took over Jerusalem in 597 BC. Of course, only important people were taken as hostages and slaves. The rest were killed. From this, we can infer that Ezekiel was an important figure in Israel. Mark Rooker writes, “Ezekiel, son of Buzi, was among the 8,000 citizens of Jerusalem deported to Babylon when King Nebuchadnezzar conquered the city in 598 BC (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Ezekiel’s call to be a prophet occurred five years later (the fifth year of King Jehoiachin’s exile), in the year 593, while he was living at Tel-abib near the Chebar river in Babylon.”[3]

Ezekiel’s mission was sad and dour. God told him that he needed someone to speak to this people “whether they listen or not.” At his commissioning, God told him:

(Ezek. 2:5-7) As for them, whether they listen or not—for they are a rebellious house—they will know that a prophet has been among them. ⁶ And you, son of man, neither fear them nor fear their words, though thistles and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions; neither fear their words nor be dismayed at their presence, for they are a rebellious house. ⁷ But you shall speak My words to them whether they listen or not, for they are rebellious.

(Ezek. 3:7) The house of Israel will not be willing to listen to you, since they are not willing to listen to Me.

God knew that the people wouldn’t listen; yet he commissioned Ezekiel to go anyhow.

Authorship

Most critical scholars accept Ezekiel’s book as authentic. Archer writes, “As recently as the eighth edition of Driver’s ILOT, the genuineness of Ezekiel had been accepted as completely authentic by the majority of rationalist critics.”^[4] S. R. Driver wrote, “No critical question arises in connection with the authorship of the book, the whole from beginning to end bearing unmistakably the stamp of a single mind.”[5] Alexander agrees that the unity of the book is held by “the majority of contemporary scholars.”^[6]

John Taylor lists six reasons for the unity of authorship in Ezekiel: First, the book has a balanced literary structure. Second, the book has an inner consistency with the center being the Fall of Jerusalem and the Destruction of the Temple. Chapters 1-24 describe the destruction, while chapters 33-48 describe its restoration. Third, the style and language are unique and uniform, including 47 phrases that are unique to this author.^[7] Fourth, the book is chronologically sequenced, and “no other major prophet has this logical progression of dates.”^[8] Fifth, the author writes in the first-person throughout the book, which implies singular authorship. Sixth, the character and personality is consistent—namely, the love of symbolism, eccentric concern for detail, and the same view of Gods transcendence.

Josephus states that Ezekiel left behind “two books,” not one (Antiquities, 10.79). Ezekiel’s singular work can be broken into two books: (1) prophetic oracles and (2) his writing as a prophet.^[9]

Date of Ezekiel

Ezekiel was called to this ministry in the 5^th year of Jehoiachin in 592 BC (Ezek. 1:1-2). His last discourse is dated to 570 BC (Ezek. 29:17). This would have put Ezekiel at middle aged (50 years old or so).

Critic C.C. Torrey held to a third century dating of Ezekiel; however, few critical scholars have followed him.[10] After the middle of the 20^th century, even critical scholars date the book to the sixth century BC.[11] Regarding the dating of Ezekiel, Robert W. Manweiler writes, “Ezekiel is probably the most carefully dated of all Old Testament books… we here note that the majority of biblical scholars, even of those who reject the inspiration and unity of the Bible, believe most of the book was written in the sixth century BC by the prophet Ezekiel.”^[12] Mark Rooker writes, “The Hebrew language used throughout the book fits well in the language strata of the exilic period, not the postexilic period. The work exhibits such homogeneity and literary coherence that it is reasonable to assert that all editorial work on the book was carried out by the prophet himself.”[13] He adds, “The occurrence of 14 historical dates attached to the beginning of many of the various oracles and prophecies of Ezekiel is another important unifying factor. The book of Ezekiel along with Haggai and Zechariah uses more dates than any other prophetic book.”[14]

Canonicity of Ezekiel

Rabbis questioned the inspiration of this book because “its words contradicted the words of the Law.”^[15] Specifically, the rabbis had difficulty harmonizing Ezekiel’s vision of the third Temple with the second Temple. OT scholar Mark Rooker writes, “The book of Ezekiel was considered one of the canonical books of the OT called the Antilogoumena, ‘disputed books.’ The reason some opposed its acceptance into the canon was because it seemed to conflict with the law of Moses on a number of accounts.”[16]

However, Roger Beckwith (a scholar of OT canonicity) writes, “The evidence in favour of the canonicity of Ezekiel is so ample and so early that the book is something of an embarrassment to those who hold the common view about the date of the closing of the canon.”[17] Beckwith gives several lines of evidence:

First, it claims to be written by a divinely-commissioned prophet.

Second, Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, 4 Maccabees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Revelation, 1 Clement, and Josephus all viewed it as inspired and thus canonical.

Third, it is included in the “Law and the Prophets” and the 22 book canon.

Examples of Ezekiel’s prophetic actions

(Ezek. 4:1-3) Ezekiel draws Jerusalem on a brick.

(Ezek. 4:4-8) Ezekiel lies on left side 390 days, on right side 40 days.

(Ezek. 4:9-17) Ezekiel cooks his dinner over dung.

(Ezek. 5:1-12) Ezekiel shaves his head and divides the hair into three parts.

(Ezek. 12:1-12) Ezekiel digs through a wall.

(Ezek. 21:18-23) Ezekiel creates crossroads.

(Ezek. 24:15-24) Ezekiel’s wife dies.

(Ezek. 33:21-22) Ezekiel can speak again.

Teaching Rotation

(Ezek. 1-3) Ezekiel’s commissioning—emphasize the importance of being faithful, rather than successful

(Ezek. 4-11) Ezekiel’s preaching—explain the strange object lessons and images that God puts Ezekiel through

(Ezek. 12-18) Focus on chapters 16 and 18—emphasize Israel being compared to a prostitute and the fairness of God’s judgment

(Ezek. 19-35) Focus on chapter 26 (prediction of Tyre) and chapter 28 (Satan)

(Ezek. 36-39) The regathering of Israel, Armageddon, and the Second Coming

(Ezek. 40-48) Ezekiel’s Third Temple (Is this literal or figurative?)

Commentary on Ezekiel

Unless otherwise stated, all citations are taken from the New American Standard Bible (NASB).

Ezekiel 1 (Ezekiel’s divine and angelic vision)

Summary: Ezekiel sees a massive cloud with lightning flashing through it (v.4). In the center, he sees glowing metal and four creatures (v.5). They looked like humans, but they had four faces and wings (v.6). The text doesn’t say that they had four heads—simply four faces. Their wings touched each other (v.9). Their faces were human, lion, ox, and eagle faces (v.10). God directed them by his Spirit (v.12—or by the wind?). They looked like burning coals with lightning striking between them (v.13), and they moved like lightning (v.14). The creatures were riding on wheels (v.15). The wheels looked like they were intersecting with each other for mobility (v.16). They were covered with eyes (v.18). Above them, there was a human-like figure on a throne (v.26). He looked like he was made of fire (v.27), likely a theophany of God.

(1:1) The “thirtieth year” is most likely Ezekiel’s age.^[18] Ezekiel was a priest (v.3), and priests entered into their ministry at the age of 30 (Num. 4:3, 23, 30, 39, 43; 1 Chron. 23:3).

God began to communicate to Ezekiel in “visions.”

(1:2) The “fifth year” of Jehoiachin’s exile was in 593 BC.^[19]

(1:3) Ezekiel was a “priest” which would explain why the book has such a priestly focus on the temple. The setting for these visions is “in the land of the Chaldeans” (i.e. Babylon). Ezekiel would’ve been a contemporary with Daniel who was exiled during the same time.

Ezekiel’s vision of the four living beings

Note the language of simile and approximation in this section. Ezekiel is using perspectival language (i.e. from his perspective the living beings looked “like” something or “resembled” something). Later, Ezekiel identifies these as “cherubim” (Ezek. 10:15, 20), which is a species of angels.

(1:4) The vision begins with what might look like an “electrical storm.”^[20]

(1:5-14) This was no ordinary storm. Inside the storm, there were four distinct creatures that looked human (v.5), yet they each had four faces and four wings. We see a similar picture in Revelation 4, but these four creatures had six wings (Rev. 4:8).

The front of the face looked like a man (v.10); the other faces were non-human.

They moved so quickly that it was hard to follow them, darting back and forth like lightning (v.14).

They moved under the direction of the “spirit,” which is most likely the Holy Spirit—not a wind.^[21] After all, why would a wind direct angels?

The wheels of the cherubim

(Ezek. 1:15-18) What are these creatures? They seem like space aliens!

(1:15) Each cherub had a wheel.

(1:16) Somehow, these four wheels intersected with one another.

(1:17) Because they were intersected, they could move in any direction without turning.

(1:18) In John’s vision of the angels, he writes, “Before the throne there was something like a sea of glass, like crystal; and in the center and around the throne, four living creatures full of eyes in front and behind” (Rev. 4:6).

(1:19-21) The wheels moved according to the direction of the Holy Spirit. They made loud noises as they moved (Ezek. 1:24; 3:12-13; 10:5, 13).

(1:22-28) Ezekiel describes this as a theophany: “Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD” (v.28). God’s glory returns in a powerful way in Ezekiel 43.

(Ezek. 1:28) How could Ezekiel see God if no one can see God and live?

Concluding insights

Why did God start off Ezekiel’s ministry with this spectacular vision? God wants us to see him in all of his glory in order to empower and embolden us to do his work and follow his will. Alexander writes, “God revealed his magnificent person to Ezekiel to prepare him for ministry. The Lord would continue to appear to Ezekiel in this same fashion throughout the book to encourage him that he was a servant of almighty God (cf. 3:12, 23-24; 8:2-4; 9:3; 10:1-20; 11:22-23; 43:2-4)… today if one is to minister for the Lord, that person must first have a divine confrontation and come to an understanding of God’s great glory; for only in light of the knowledge of God will one have strength and perseverance to serve God humbly—no matter what the situation may be. This divine confrontation adds seriousness and purpose to the call of God’s servant. He may not necessarily see a vision or have an emotional experience in this confrontation, but the Holy Spirit will impress God’s character on the servant’s heart as he seeks to live and minister in light of God’s person revealed in God’s Word.”^[22]

Ezekiel 2 (Ezekiel’s calling and commission)

Summary: God gave Ezekiel his Spirit (v.2), and commissioned him to go to Israel. God tells him that Israel is stubborn and not inclined to listen (v.4). But whether or not they listen, God wants them to have a chance to hear from a prophet (v.5). He tells Ezekiel not to be afraid—three times! (v.6) God also tells Ezekiel to eat God’s words on a scroll (v.8).

(2:1) The phrase “son of man” is used for Ezekiel 90x. The only other place this expression is used is in Daniel 7:13; 8:17.^[23] The title was given to Ezekiel to show that he was utterly dependent on God, because he was just a man.^[24] This is not analogous to Jesus’ title (used 84x in the gospels), which is derived from Daniel 7.

(2:2) God gave Ezekiel his “Spirit” in order to speak for him. God gives us what we need to accomplish what he calls us to do.

(2:3-4) God didn’t sugarcoat the truth: Ezekiel’s mission would be a difficult one. God called him to go speak to people who were “rebellious,” “stubborn,” and “obstinate.”

(2:5) God called him to speak—even if the people wouldn’t listen. Alexander rightly comments, “How important it is that God’s spokesmen today take heed to this principle!”^[25]

(2:6-7) God tells Ezekiel not to be afraid no less than three times! God knew what difficult circumstances Ezekiel would encounter, and yet, God told him to be courageous in the face of opposition.

The “thistles, thorns, and scorpions” seem to be metaphorical for the frightful people he would encounter.

(2:8-10) God tells Ezekiel to “eat” his words on a scroll. The content of the message was “lamentation, mourning and woe” (v.10). This must symbolize how Ezekiel needed to “digest” God’s truth before he would be ready to go out and speak for him. Later, the words became as sweet as honey to Ezekiel (Ezek. 3:3), because it is God’s word.

(Ezek. 2:8-3:3) Why does God tell him to eat this scroll?

Ezekiel 3 (Ezekiel’s calling and commission continued)

Summary: The scroll tasted good (v.3). God tells Ezekiel to talk to Israel—even though they are hardened. But God promises that he will strengthen Ezekiel to be just as stubborn (v.9). He was picked up and taken to Tel Abib (v.15) and collected himself. Ezekiel’s job was to speak God’s word. If he doesn’t do this, he will be responsible for the results (vv.19-20). God begins Ezekiel’s ministry… by silencing him (v.26).

(3:1-3) Even though God’s word was filled with judgment (Ezek. 2:10), it is still as “sweet as honey” (v.3; Ps. 19:10; 119:103; Prov. 16:24; 24:13-14; Jer. 15:16).

(3:4-6) This is a real indictment on the people of Israel. The Gentiles were more inclined to hear God’s word than the Jewish people.

(3:7) The reason that the people would reject Ezekiel is that they were rejecting God (v.7). For the believer, we need to keep this in mind as well. When we share the truth in love, people might reject it, but they are rejecting God—not us.

(3:8-9) The people were “stubborn” but God made Ezekiel just as stubborn to rebut them. God gave Ezekiel a thick skin, so to speak, in order to accomplish the work that he had for him.

(3:10-11) Ezekiel needed to deeply understand God’s word in order to speak it to others.

(3:12-13) Again, God gave Ezekiel his Spirit and his presence to reassure him of his calling and commission.

(3:14-15) Ezekiel needed time to process what he had just heard. He wasn’t happy and excited about his calling. Instead, his “bitterness” and “rage” (!!). The term “bitterness” (mar) can be rendered “distress,” “heavy heart,” and “anguish.”^[26]

God put his hand on Ezekiel during this weeklong period to let him sort this out. The seven day period was used for mourning of death (Gen. 50:10; Num. 19:11; Job 2:13) and for being consecrated as a priest (Lev. 8:33). Ezekiel had just turned 30 years old, and he was being consecrated as a priest before he went out to speak.

(3:16) A “watchman” would look for invading armies outside of the city or dangers within in (2 Sam. 18:24-27; 2 Kings 9:17-20).

(3:17-21) The watchman was responsible to stay alert and watch for dangers. If he was sleeping on the job, so to speak, he would be held responsible for the disaster. Similarly, God called Ezekiel a watchman in his prophetic ministry, warning the people of the judgment of God. Ezekiel was held responsible for whether or not he preached accurately to the people. The “obstacle” was “equivalent to a death sentence.”^[27]

(3:22-23) God continued to reveal his glory to Ezekiel during this time. Perhaps Ezekiel needed extra encouragement to take on this difficult task.

(3:24-27) Ezekiel’s muteness lasted for 7.5 years (Ezek. 1:1-3; 33:21-22).^[28] This doesn’t mean that Ezekiel did not speak for this entire time, because the book records that he did (Ezek. 11:25; 14:1; 20:1). Instead, it means that Ezekiel would stay inside his house, rather than preaching in the streets. He would often act out his prophecies with dramatic scenes, instead of preaching openly. He would typically be mute unless God opened his mouth to speak (v.27).

Concluding insights

God gave Ezekiel a difficult mission, but he gave him everything he needed to accomplish his work (e.g. his Spirit, visions, stubbornness, etc.).

The only result that God asked from Ezekiel was to be faithful to say what God wanted.

Ezekiel emotionally wrestled with what God had charged him to do, but he still chose to follow God anyhow.

God really tackled Ezekiel’s fear by reassuring Ezekiel of his presence and power.

Ezekiel 4 (The brick model of Jerusalem under siege)

It may be helpful to google an artistic rendering of this prophetic drama. For example, see this image for clarity.

(4:1-3) Ezekiel took a clay brick and carved the image of Jerusalem on the top of the brick (v.1). Next, Ezekiel built siege ramps, battering rams, and enemy camps all around the brick city of Jerusalem. It must’ve looked like Ezekiel was playing toy games—like a little boy playing G.I. Joes in his sandbox. The people would come over and watch him, as he created this scene silently.

The “iron plate” (v.3) was used by priests in their offerings (Lev. 2:5; 6:21; 7:9). The plate could represent that Ezekiel was himself protected from the siege by the iron plate.^[29]

(Ezek. 4:4-8) How could Ezekiel lay on his side for over a year?

(4:4-8) Ezekiel was somehow “bearing their iniquity” by doing this. By facing the city on the left side, he would’ve been facing from the north (perhaps symbolizing the northern kingdom’s guilt?).^[30] By facing the city on the right side, he would be facing Judah—the southern kingdom.

In total, Ezekiel lay on his side for 430 years (390 + 40). To what does this correspond? Alexander refrains from dogmatism, but he holds that this refers to the span of time between the deportation into the Exile (597 BC) to the Maccabean Revolt (167 BC),^[31] at which point Israel became a liberated state again. However, this doesn’t seem to fit with God’s judgment being expended after the 70 year Exile. In truth, we aren’t sure to what the 430 years correspond.

(Ezek. 4:4-8) How could Ezekiel lay on his side for over a year?

(4:9) This is the recipe for “Ezekiel Bread.”

(4:10-11) This small amount of food and water represented “the reality of the famine during the siege of Jerusalem.”^[32]

(4:12-13) He fixed his food over a fire made of dried human feces. This symbolized how the Jews would eat unclean food in Exile.

(4:14) Ezekiel protests about eating food cooked over human dung. For one, it’s gross (!!), but also, it was ceremonially unclean (Deut. 14:3; 23:12-14).

(4:15) God permits him to use cow dung to cook his food instead of human feces.

(4:16-17) All of this prophetic drama showed how the people would be starving during the siege.

Ezekiel 5 (Hair cut—symbolizes the slaughter, starvation, and scattering)

(5:1) Ezekiel needs to cut his hair and beard with a sharp sword. This was a sign of mourning (Ezek. 27:31; Isa. 22:12; Jer. 16:16; Amos 8:10), humiliation (2 Sam. 10:4), and ritual impurity (Deut. 14:1). If a priest shaved his head, he became ritually impure (Lev. 21:5). Alexander comments, “Ezekiel defiled and humiliated himself as a symbol of the humiliation of the people of Judah who were defiled and no longer holy to the Lord.”^[33]

(5:2-4) The three piles would be used in Ezekiel’s clay model of the Siege of Jerusalem: One third would be burned in the city (2 Kings 25:9); one third would be killed by the sword (2 Kin. 25:18-21a; 2 Chron. 36:17); one third would be “exiled” (2 Kings 25:11, 21b). Some of the hair would be spared as a remnant (in Ezekiel’s robe).

This is all explained clearly in verse 12.

Explanation of the prophetic drama

(5:5-7) The symbolic act is explained clearly. The reason for judgment was their failure to keep the covenant. They didn’t even live up to the standards of the Gentiles who surrounded them.

(5:8-9) Judgment was also because of idolatry (v.11).

(5:10) The siege would be so bad that the people would give in to cannibalism.

(5:11) The people brought idolatry into the Temple.

(5:12) See verses 1-3.

(5:13) The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple would be an act of God’s wrath. And yet, this verse implies that his wrath would not be perpetual. Instead, it would be satisfied or “appeased” after this.

(5:15) Israel would become a lesson to the nations.

(5:16-17) God will shoot to kill! Israel will be judged with famine and disease. Twice (v.15, 17) God says, “I, the LORD, have spoken.”

Ezekiel 6 (Prophecy to the mountain shrines)

(6:1-3) The pagan shrines on the mountains will be destroyed. Alexander writes, “Syncretistic Canaanite religion—with its perverted emphasis on sex, war, cults of the dead, snake worship, and idolatry—preferred high places and groves of trees for its place of worship.”^[34]

(6:4-5) The “scattering” of the bones communicated shame and uncleanness (Ps. 53:5; 141:7). The bones belonged to the idol worshippers (2 Kin. 23:20; Jer. 8:1-2). These people literally gave everything they had (their very lives!) to the idols.

(6:6-7) Through judgment, God would communicate that he was real to the idol-worshipping people.

(6:8-10) God gave a way of escape. Those people who turned to God during this time would be exiled—not killed. They will realize that idolatry hurt them, but it also hurt God himself (v.9).

(6:11) The “clapping of hands” could refer to happiness or mocking (Ezek. 21:14-17; 22:13; 25:6; cf. Lam. 2:15; Nah. 3:19). This refers to “God’s delight over the comprehensive eradication of pagan shrines and practices from the land.”^[35]

(6:12) God will bring war, disease, and starvation.

(6:13-14) God will reveal his reality through this judgment. The people will no longer wonder if idols are real. Instead, they will “know” that Yahweh is real.

“Diblah” is an “unknown place.”^[36]

Ezekiel 7 (Further judgment)

(7:1-4) In the first six verses, Ezekiel uses the word “end” six times. Judgment is imminent. God is going to exercise judgment without “pity” (v.4).

(Ezek. 7:2) Did the biblical authors believe in a flat earth?

(7:5-9) God will not show “pity” (v.9), but he will judge them for their “abominations” (v.8, 9).

(7:10) The “rod” of judgment most likely refers to Nebuchadnezzar.^[37]

(7:11) Babylon was also filled with “wickedness” (v.21), but God was using them as an agent of judgment.

Their money won’t save them.

(7:12-13) The buying and selling could refer to the Year of Jubilee, where the people would regain their land in seven years.^[38] In this case, Ezekiel is telling the people that they will be gone long before seven years is up. It could also just refer to the meaninglessness of wealth in lieu of the coming judgment. Whether they were doing well or poorly in the “stock market,” the entire economy was about to crash.

(7:14) Even though the watchman sounded the trumpet warning them of war, the people wouldn’t be able to gather an army.

(7:15) War will come from the outside, and famine and disease will kill those inside.

(7:16-18) Even if they escape to the mountains, this will only bring moaning and wetting their pants with fear (“their knees will be wet with urine” NET).

(7:19) Money will be worthless in the day of judgment.

(7:20-22) Since the people polluted the Temple with idolatry and immorality, God gave it over to the Babylonians to be looted.

(7:23-24) The “chain” refers to deportation, exile, and slavery. Babylon would carry out God’s judgment—even though they were a wicked nation (“worst of the nations”).

(7:25-27) Too late, the people will seek out a prophet for revelation or guidance. They want to repent after the judgment has already come, but God will follow through with the judgment.

Ezekiel 8 (Vision of Idolatry in the Temple)

(8:1) In September of 592 BC,^[39] Ezekiel had all of leaders of Judah in his home. As he sat with the leaders, God gave him a vision. This would be roughly 420 days into his time of lying on his side in front of the model of Jerusalem.^[40]

(8:2) The image of this man must have been overwhelming to see. His lower half looked like fire, and his upper half looked like “glowing metal” (cf. Ezek. 1:4).

(8:3) Ezekiel wasn’t physically moved, but was brought “in the visions of God” to the Temple.

The “idol of jealousy” was likely Asherah—the mother-goddess of the Canaanite pantheon (2 Kin. 21:7; 2 Chron. 33:7, 15).^[41] Jeremiah referred to the “queen of heaven,” which likely refers to Asherah as well (Jer. 7:18; 44:17-30).

(8:4) Here, in the Temple, Ezekiel could see God’s glory—just like he saw it earlier (Ezek. 1).

(8:5) No one used the north gate regularly expect the king.

(8:6) God explains that the “abominations” will only get worse.

Is it wrong for God to be jealous?

(8:7-9) Ezekiel dug into a wall and found a secret passage into the Temple. Inside, the leadership felt like they could practice idolatry without God seeing them.

(8:10-11) The “seventy elders” were not the Sanhedrin, which historically hadn’t been created yet. These are most likely based on Moses’ seventy elders that he had appointed to help him govern the people (Ex. 24:1, 9; Num. 11:16-25).^[42]

“Jaazaniah” might be the son of Shaphan—Josiah’s secretary of state (2 Kin. 22:8-14; 2 Chron. 34:15-21; Jer. 26:24; 29:3; 36:10; 40:5, 9, 11; 41:2; 43:6). If this is the same man, then it would “show the rapid degradation of leadership in Judah.”^[43]

(8:12-13) The elders rationalized their idolatry by denying God’s omniscience and omnibenevolence—that is, they believed God couldn’t see them and God didn’t love them.

(8:14-15) “Tammuz” was an ancient “Akkadian deity, the husband and brother of Ishtar.”^[44] The women were “weeping” for Tammuz because he was a fertility God who was thought to “die” in the fall and “resurrect” in the spring.^[45] Since this prophecy dates to September, this would fit with the god “dying” in the fall.

(8:16) Men were worshipping the sun, while they had their backs to the Temple. Moses wrote, “Beware not to lift up your eyes to heaven and see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, and be drawn away and worship them and serve them, those which the Lord your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven” (Deut. 4:19).

Since they were in the inner temple, these are likely priests (2 Chron. 4:9; Joel 2:17).

(8:17-18) The idolatry led to violence in the people’s lives. By putting the “twig” to their nose, they were acting out “part of the ritual practice of sun worship, a concept that fits this context well.”^[46]

Ezekiel 9 (Receive the mark or receive judgment)

(9:1-2) The “upper gate” is the northern gate (cf. 2 Kin. 15:35; 2 Chron. 27:3; Jer. 20:2; 36:10). Divine messengers (or angels) typically wore “linen” (Dan. 10:5; 12:6-7; Rev. 15:6). Remember, this is all a vision—not literal events. The Babylonians literally desecrated the Temple and killed the people. These “six executioners” symbolized God’s sovereignty in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.

(9:3) God’s “glory” typically dwelled in the Holy of Holies. Here, it leaves the Holy of Holies to go out to the “threshold” of the Temple, dwelling with the six executioners.

(9:4) Those who rejected the idolatry were spared. They were given a “mark” to protect them (cf. Rev. 7:3; 9:4; 14:1).

(9:5-7) The six executioners killed those people who were unrepentant for their idolatry and abominations. Only those with the mark were spared. Judgment was given out regardless of position, age, or sex.

What is the significance of starting in the Temple? This was the epicenter of the problem. The religious leaders were corrupt, and God solved the problem here first.

(9:8) The vision of judgment was so severe that Ezekiel worried that God would even kill the remnant.

(9:9-10) This is a pun: The people think that God doesn’t see, so God says he won’t see them with pity.

Ezekiel didn’t live in the city, so these visions were probably important to show just how bad the sin was. God wanted to show Ezekiel why his judgment was so severe.

(9:11) This answers Ezekiel’s worry in verse 8. The angel had officially marked those who were part of the remnant.

Ezekiel 10 (The cherubim)

In the Exodus, the glory of God would move as a sign of his presence. In 1 Kings 8, when Solomon dedicated the Temple, the glory came upon the Temple. Here, God’s glory was leaving the Temple (Ezek. 9:3), and now, the city of Jerusalem.

(10:1-2) While Nebuchadnezzar brought God’s judgment on a human level, this was ultimately under God’s sovereignty. The “coals of fire” represented judgment and/or purification (Isa. 6).^[47]

(Ezek. 10:2ff) Why do the angels have wheels?

(10:3-5) Because the six executioners brought judgment and purification in the Temple, God goes to fill the Temple again (cf. v.18).

(10:6-7) The wheels of the cherubim must have been enormous in the vision, because the angel in linen can walk into it.

(10:8-17) The imagery here is almost identical to the imagery in Ezekiel 1. The only difference is that these beings are specifically called “cherubim,” and the one face was previously described as an “ox” face is now described as a “cherub” face (v.14). Alexander writes, “This may be in keeping with the form of the cherubim in ancient Near Eastern sculpture as described in the previous paragraph. Perhaps a “cherub” had the look of a bull or an ox.”^[48]

(10:18-19) The glory departed from the threshold of the Temple. It would finally depart later (Ezek. 11:22-23).

(10:20-22) Again, this imagery is almost identical to Ezekiel 1.

Ezekiel 11 (Where is the true sanctuary?)

This entire time, Ezekiel has been wondering if the remnant would be with the people in the city and the Temple. Is that where God’s sanctuary will be? Is that where God’s protection will be? We discover that God’s sanctuary is… God himself! He is going to give sanctuary and safety to the exiles. The exiles will be the remnant—not the people in Jerusalem! What a stunning reversal!

(11:1) Alexander holds that this is a different group of twenty five men who were mentioned earlier as idol worshippers (Ezek. 8:16).^[49] For one, “Jaazaniah” is the son of “Azzur,” rather than the son of Shapan (Ezek. 8:11).

(11:2-3) This is not a question as NIV states (see NASB). The “pot” (Jerusalem) protected the “meat” (the people). These men were claiming that they should build houses in the city and ignore the prophecies about destruction.

(11:4-6) Remember, the evil leaders functionally denied God’s omniscience and his goodness. Ezekiel affirms both, and he predicts judgment for them for their actions.

(11:7, 11) Ezekiel changes the analogy: The “meat” are the dead people—not the living. The “pot” (Jerusalem) would protect the dead—not the living.

(11:8-10) God will bring judgment on the people when they flee the city (2 Kings 25:18-21).

(11:12) The people were judged for their conformity to the nations.

(11:13) The death of “Pelatiah” made Ezekiel wonder if the remnant would indeed be destroyed along with the others.

(11:14-15) The citizens of Jerusalem believed the exiles were under God’s judgment, and this is why they told them to leave. But as it turns out, the remnant was in Babylon the whole time!

(11:16) God was the “sanctuary” for the people—not the walls of Jerusalem.

(11:17) After the Exile, the people will return.

(11:18-20) This is similar language of the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:26-27). Alexander understands this to be fulfilled in the Church Age.^[50]

(11:21) God gives a warning to those who wouldn’t listen: judgment.

(11:22-23) The glory of God left Jerusalem and settled on a mountain to the east—most likely the Mount of Olives.^[51] It wouldn’t return until the New Temple is built (Ezek. 43:1-4).

(11:24-25) This vision started in Ezekiel 8. Now, after all of this, Ezekiel returns to share this vision with the exiles in Babylon. This would have been encouraging for them to hear—even if it was also frightening.

Answering Objections to Judgment (Chs. 12-19)

Ezekiel systematically responds to the exiles’ false beliefs in this section.

Ezekiel 12 (Ezekiel acts out what it looks like to be an Exile)

Since there is no chronological marker, it’s safe to assume that this string of prophecies (Ezek. 12-19) were given sometime after those given earlier (Ezek. 8-11).

(12:1-2) God had warned Ezekiel that the people were rebellious (Ezek. 2:3-8). Here, we see this theme repeated again. The reason that they couldn’t “see” or “hear” was because they were “rebellious” (compare with Isa. 6:9-10).

(12:3-7) Ezekiel is supposed to pack up in broad daylight so the people can see what an exile looks like. This would be a “sign” that the people could see and watch (v.6, 11). This showed that God was going to bring more judgment back at home in Jerusalem, and more exiles would be coming to Babylon.

Why did Ezekiel cover his face? (v.6) Alexander writes, “Ezekiel’s covering of his face in the dramatization most likely indicated that Zedekiah would seek to disguise himself in his flight from the city. The fact that in fleeing he ‘will not see’ the land with his eyes would correlate with Zedekiah’s blinding and deportation.”^[52]

(12:8-9) The exiles had already been through two deportations themselves (605 BC and 597 BC), but they still didn’t understand what this prophetic drama meant. Because they were a “rebellious” people (v.2), it’s more likely that they didn’t want to know.

(12:10-14) The “prince” refers to Zedekiah, because he was not a legitimate king. Jehoiachin was the true king, but he was in Babylonia at this time.^[53] Zedekiah escaped by night in exactly this way (2 Kin. 25:4; Jer. 39:4; 52:7).

(12:15-16) In this time, military battles would show the veracity (or truthfulness) of your local deity. If your army failed, it meant that you had a weak god. Here, God sends the exiles to show that he was in control—even amidst the judgment on Jerusalem.^[54]

(12:17-20) Ezekiel acted out trembling with anxiety as he ate and drank. This symbolized what the people would feel during the Exile. Ezekiel would’ve looked like a stage performer, acting out these scenes to the people. We wonder if big crowds would gather to watch his prophetic dramas.

(12:21-28) The people had created a proverb to deny prophecy. Instead, every prophecy will be fulfilled imminently. The people interpreted God’s gracious waiting as God being impotent in his power or untrustworthy in his word. Instead, God was going to fulfill everything that he promised. Originally, the people denied God’s fulfillment altogether, but then, they changed this to deny the timeframe (i.e. it won’t happen until the “distant future”). Ezekiel disagrees on both fronts: God’s word is true and it will be fulfilled soon. Alexander writes, “It is tragic that mankind often learns this truth only through the experience of judgment or discipline.”^[55]

Ezekiel 13 (Judgment against false prophets)

Summary: Ezekiel gives judgment against the false prophets. These prophets were spreading false prophecies to the people. He gives the analogy of the false prophets are building up a “big wall” for protection. But it’s really just a “white wall” or a fake wall that has no substance. This fits with the concluding thoughts in chapter 12 about how all divine prophecy will be fulfilled.

(13:1-3) The “foolishness” of the prophets meant more than mere stupidity. This term is used in conjunction with blasphemy (Ps. 74:18), pride (1 Sam. 25:25), and atheism (Ps. 14:1). They refused to seek God’s true revelation (cf. Jer. 23:16-22). These so-called prophets were only following their own “spirits” and imaginations.

(13:4) “Foxes” can also be rendered “jackals” (NIV). Regardless, these animals didn’t care for ruins of a city. They just wanted to profit off of the ruin.

(13:5) The “day of the LORD” doesn’t refer to the end of history, but to the immediate destruction by Babylon, as the context makes clear (Ezek. 12).

(13:6-7) The false prophets had false “hope” that their prophecies would be fulfilled. But this hope was misplaced.

(13:8) One of the clearest ways for people to discern a false prophet was to see that God himself was against them.

(13:9) The messages of the false prophets would not be committed into writing. Therefore, it would fade. Only true prophets had their prophecies written down.

(13:10-16) Alexander takes these “walls” to be the literal walls of the homes of the people.^[56] Since the false prophets were telling people that judgment was not coming, they also told the people to build nice looking homes. This speaks to us today of the empty claims of materialism—especially in the time of judgment.

(13:17-19) Witchcraft and divination was a clear sign of a false prophet (Lev. 19:26). Alexander writes, “The practice of the false prophetesses was to tie bands of cloth to their wrists and place veils over their heads as they cast spells over people’s lives in order to bind them and hunt them down… Hittite practices and later Syrian rituals demonstrate that divination was carried out with barley bread either as part of the pagan sacrificial ritual or as a means of determining whether the victim would live or die.”^[57]

(13:20-23) God himself promised to judge the false prophets.

Ezekiel 14 (False prophets will be destroyed, and so will Israel)

(14:1-3) These “elders” came to seek divine wisdom and guidance from Ezekiel. Outwardly, this looked like the right thing to do, because they were acknowledging him as a true prophet. However, they were inwardly worshipping idols “in their hearts” (v.3). Alexander comments, “This verse is important for those who come to Scripture seeking guidance. No true direction can be given to those who have erected idols in their hearts.”^[58]

(14:4-7) God extends this from the elders to “any man” (v.4) or “anyone” (v.7) in Israel. If they continue to pursue idolatry, God himself will give them an answer—not just the prophet. He will do this in order to get ahold of their hearts again (v.5).

(14:8) NIV translates “proverb” as “byword” (cf. Deut. 28:37).

(Ezek. 14:9) Does God deceive people?

(14:10-11) God is going to use judgment to purge idolatry from the people.

(14:12-14) Ezekiel may have wondered if God would relent from judgment in a manner similar to Abraham’s plea for Sodom (Gen. 18). But God refuses to do so based on his character and his promise to judge (Lev. 26:22-26). Even “Daniel,” Ezekiel’s contemporary in Babylon, wouldn’t be able to stop God’s judgment for the rest of the people.

(14:15-20) All three of these men were righteous: Noah (Gen. 6:9), Job (Job 1:1, 8; 2:3), and Daniel (Dan. 6:4-5, 22).

(14:21-23) Alexander holds that the remnant were unrighteous. The term “actions” (ʿ^alîlāh) consistently “has an evil connotation in reference to mankind.”^[59] If this is the case, then this passage is a great example of God’s grace for his people—despite their evil actions.

Ezekiel 15 (Israel is a useless vine)

Israel was often compared to a vine (Isa. 5:1-7; Jer. 2:21; Hos. 10:1). The people likely were arguing that they would be saved from another judgment, because they were God’s chosen nation (“vine”) and because they had already lived through two deportations. However, Ezekiel gives this illustration about a useless, burnt vine to show that burning (i.e. judgment) only made the vine more useless.

(15:1-2) The wood from a vine wasn’t better than the wood from the other trees. In essence, Israel wasn’t better than any of the other nations.

(15:3) This type of wood was so useless that they couldn’t even use it as a peg to hang something.

(15:4-5) The wood wouldn’t magically become more useful after being burned in a fire! Similarly, Israel hadn’t become better because they had gone through two deportations by the Babylonians.

(15:6-8) Nebuchadnezzar eventually burned Jerusalem to the ground in 586 BC (2 Kin. 25:9). The reason for judgment was the fact that Israel had broken the Mosaic Covenant.

Ezekiel 16 (Spiritual adultery)

Summary: God describes how he (metaphorically) birthed Israel, watched her through puberty, and finally, married her. But Israel became an adulterous prostitute (v.15-16), giving sex away for free (v.33). In fact, Israel was a prostitute that paid her lovers (v.34). Ezekiel uses the two most intimate relationships (e.g. parenting and marriage) to show God’s tenderness, and how deep Israel’s betrayal went.

(16:1-2) The message about the useless vine (Ezek. 15) must not have been enough to convince Jerusalem. So, God told Ezekiel to “make known” or “confront” (NIV, NLT, NET) Jerusalem with her “abominations.” This explains the lewd language in this chapter. God spoke through Ezekiel in lewd language to show Jerusalem how serious their sins was. Of course, “Jerusalem” is metonymy for the whole nation of Israel.^[60]

(16:3) This is simply teaching that the city of Jerusalem was built by the Canaanites (before the Hebrews arrived).^[61]

(16:4-5) The imagery of infant exposure could refer to Jerusalem being unconquered for many years (Josh. 15:63).

(16:6-7) Alexander associates this epoch with David’s conquering of the city of Jerusalem (2 Sam. 5:6-10).^[62] It seems to us that this is simply referring to the nation before the Exodus. They were growing and multiplying, but they were in unstable conditions.

(16:8-14) God married the nation of Israel. God gave incredible wealth and prosperity to the nation.

(16:15) Before God blessed Israel with material wealth and prosperity, he warned the nation to beware of forgetting him (Deut. 6:10-12). The nation of Israel “loved the gifts rather than the giver.”^[63]

(16:16-22) The nation made idols and practiced ritual sex around them (2 Kin. 23:7) and performed child sacrifice upon them (2 Kin. 16:3; 21:6; 23:10; Jer. 32:35). The reason for Israel’s depravity is that she “did not remember” all that God had done for her (v.22). NT believers often forget what Jesus has done for us, so we are far more similar than different in this regard.

(16:23-25) Israel became an advocate for false religion. The language of how Israel “spread her legs” describes spiritual adultery.

(16:26-29) Choosing Egypt as a political ally was considered adultery in God’s mind (2 Kin. 17:4; 18:21; Isa. 30:7; 36:2). After all, God has rescued Israel from Egypt in the past, and now, they were returning to Egypt for protection (!!). Consequently, Israel longed for alliances with Assyria (2 Kings 15:19-20; 16:7-18) and even Babylon (2 Kings 20:12-19). These alliances would have involved worshipping the deities of these nations.^[64]

(16:30-34) Ezekiel describes Israel as a prostitute that pays for sex, instead of being paid. This probably refers to how Israel would pay these foreign nations money for protection.

(16:35-41) Public stoning was the consequence of adultery (Lev. 20:10), which is likely why this imagery is used here (v.40). The judgment would be public—not private.

(16:42-43) God’s judgment was pacified after the Babylonian Exile in 586 BC.^[65] After this point, Israel returned to a strict monotheistic worship of Yahweh.

(16:44-48) The three cites (Jerusalem, Samaria, Sodom) are compared to three sisters. They were birthed from the Hittites and Amorites. Jerusalem was like her mother (v.44), in that the Canaanite idolatry affected her, Samaria, and Sodom. It would’ve been particularly shocking to hear that Jerusalem was worse than Sodom!

(16:49-50) The sin of Sodom was both materialism (Gen. 13:10) and sexual promiscuity (Gen. 19:4-5, “abominations”). Jeremiah compared Israel to Sodom (Jer. 23:14).

(16:51-52) At this point in history, Samaria had already been decimated and exiled by the Assyrians (722 BC). Yet Ezekiel states that Jerusalem was twice as evil as Samaria! (“Samaria did not commit half of your sins.”)

(16:53-58) God was going to restore all of these people (Sodom, Samaria, and Jerusalem), and this would humble Israel of self-righteousness to see this.

(16:59) This refers to the Mosaic Covenant.

(16:60) God had promised to restore Israel after they fell, because of the Abrahamic Covenant (Lev. 26:40-45).

(16:61-63) After these events, God will return to his “covenant” with Israel, which most likely refers to the Abrahamic Covenant in context, or perhaps the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34).

Ezekiel 17 (The two eagles and the twigs)

The riddle

(17:1-2) A “riddle” (ḥîḏāh) can also be translated as an “allegory.”^[66]

(17:3-6) The first eagle came to Lebanon (i.e. the land of Canaan; Josh. 1:4; 2 Kin. 14:9). The eagle gave the twigs of the trees to the “merchants” of Babylon (Ezek. 16:29). The eagle also planted some of the seeds and it turned into a fruitful vine (Deut. 8:7; 11:11).

(17:7-10) The second eagle drew the vine away from its original soil. Consequently, the vine would not survive.

The interpretation

(17:11-14) The first eagle (vv.3-6) was Nebuchadnezzar (v.12), who took away Jehoiachin. With the royal seed taken out of the way, the remaining people wouldn’t thrive (under Zedekiah).

(17:15-21) The second eagle is Egypt. Zedekiah had broken his alliance with Nebuchadnezzar (2 Chron. 36:13), and the nation did not thrive. Both Isaiah (Isa. 30:1-2) and Jeremiah (Jer. 37:7) opposed this covenant with Egypt. Consequently, the remaining nation would be destroyed (in 586 BC) by Nebuchadnezzar.

Epilogue

(17:22) This new “twig” refers to the Messiah (Isa. 11:1; Jer. 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Zech. 3:8; 6:12-13).^[67]

(17:23-24) The “birds” might refer to the nations seeking shade under the tree of the Messianic Kingdom (cf. Mt. 13:31-32).^[68]

Ezekiel 18 (God’s judgment and his forgiveness)

Summary: The people were wondering why the next generation was suffering from God’s exile of Israel, if they were innocent. God affirms that each person will be judged for their own sins. This shows that God will be fair with his judgment.

(18:1-3) The people clung to the proverb “like mother, like daughter” (Ezek. 16:44). This may have resulted in them thinking that judgment was fatalistic, and it didn’t matter what the younger generation did in the exile.

Here, Ezekiel confronts that proverb, as well as another: “The fathers eat the sour grapes, but the children’s teeth are set on edge” (v.2). This means, in effect, that “what the father did affected his children.”^[69]

This is a misapplication of the social effects^[70] of sin explained in Exodus 20:5, where the Law says, “[I] am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me” (cf. Deut. 5:9). Jeremiah also refers to this false interpretation of God’s judgment (Jer. 31:27-30; Lam. 5:7). People are judged for their own decisions (Gen. 2:17; 4:7; Deut. 24:16; 2 Kin. 14:6; Ezek. 3:16-21; 14:12-20; 33:1-20).

(18:4) This refers to physical death—not spiritual death.^[71]

EXAMPLE #1. A righteous father

(18:5) The big picture describes a man who follows justice and righteousness. The rest of the verses explain this in greater detail.

(18:6) The “mountain shrines” were places of idol worship, and these were forbidden to be places where a person could eat because of the idolatrous implications (Deut. 12:2-4).

Adultery was forbidden (Ex. 20:14; Deut. 22:22).

Sex with a woman on her menstrual cycle was forbidden (Lev. 15:24; 18:19; 20:10, 18).

(18:7) The man needed to pay back a poor debtor’s pledge (Ex. 22:26-27; Deut. 24:6; Amos 2:8).

“Robbery” was forbidden (Ex. 20:15; Lev. 19:13).

Caring for the poor was commanded (Deut. 15:11; 24:19-22; Isa. 58:7).

(18:8) Taking interest on loans to a fellow Israelite was forbidden (Ex. 22:25; Deut. 23:10-20; Ps. 15:5; Isa. 24:2).

Practicing justice was commanded (Lev. 19:15-16, 35-36; Deut. 25:13-16).

(18:9) Righteousness and justice is defined by the Mosaic Law (Lev. 18:1-5; Deut. 11; 26:16-19; 30:15-20).

EXAMPLE #2. An unrighteous son

(18:10-13) An unrighteous son would face death for his own crimes. He couldn’t claim that his father’s righteousness apply to him.

EXAMPLE #3. A righteous grandson

(18:14-18) If the grandson follows the Mosaic Covenant (like his grandfather), he will experience blessing—not judgment. Notice the similarity of language with the grandfather (vv.5-9).

Rejoinder by the exiles: “The son SHOULD pay for the father’s sins.”

(18:19) The exiles ask why the son should not face judgment because of his father’s sin.

(18:20) God replies that he judges individuals for their own decisions.

(18:21-22) Those who repent will be forgiven for their past sins.

(18:23) God is happy when wicked people come to him.

(18:24) Similar to the unrighteous man (vv.21-22), God can and will judge the righteous man who falls away. Alexander takes this to refer to physical death—not spiritual and eternal separation from God.^[72]

Rejoinder by the exiles: “God is not just!”

(18:25-29) The exiles claimed that there was no justice what God said (v.25). The word “righteous” in Hebrew fundamentally speaks of what is “right.” God repeats his principles for righteousness, and then he argues that they were unrighteous—not Him.

Repent and live!

(18:30-32) We might expect this chapter to end on an angry note. But God ends with an invitation to receive pardon from their many sins, a new life, and a “new heart and a new spirit” (cf. Ezek. 36:26).

Ezekiel 19 (Lamenting the nation’s rulers)

This is a lament against Israel’s princes (v.1). Israel will be dried up and destroyed.

(19:1) These rulers were excellent examples of the unrighteous people described in chapter 18. God wants a lamentation for these rulers.

(19:2) The imagery of a “lion” often referred to the Davidic line (Gen. 49:9; Num. 23:24; 1 Kin. 10:19-20; Mic. 5:8; Rev. 5:5). The “lioness” refers to the nation of Israel.^[73]

(19:3-4) This refers to Jehoahaz, who was killed in Egypt (2 Kin. 23:33-34; 2 Chron. 36:1-4, Jer. 22:10-12).^[74]

(19:5-9) This refers to Jehoiachin (Jehoiakim’s son). He was put in a “cage” in Babylon in 597 BC (2 Kin. 25:27-30; 2 Chron. 36:9-11).^[75]

(19:10-11) The symbol of a “vine” refers to the nation of Israel (Ezek. 15:1-6; 17:1-10; cf. Ps. 80:8-16; Isa. 5:1-7; 27:2-6). Israel was also “planted” by waters to flourish (Deut. 8:7-8).

(19:12) The nation was destroyed by Babylon, the “east wind” (Ezek. 17:6-10, 15).

(19:13) The nation was sent into captivity and exile.

(19:14) The “fire” refers to Zedekiah’s failure as a leader, which led to the nation’s destruction.^[76]

Evil Leadership (Chs. 20-23)

This section (chs. 20-23) starts a whole new section of the book starting in 591 BC (Ezek. 20:1). The earlier revelations were 11 months earlier (Ezek. 8:1).^[77]

Ezekiel 20 (Hypocritical, idol-worshipping leaders want God’s counsel)

Summary: God wanted to save the Israelites from idolatry (v.7). This chapter repeats the history of God’s promise to disperse the nation if they rebelled (Deut. 28). The concept of the Wilderness Wandering is a type of how God was going to send the nation into Exile (vv.34-36). He will bring them back again (v.41). The people were too dense to understand the meaning (v.49).

(20:1) This dates to 591 BC.^[78] The leaders and “elders” came to seek counsel from God through Ezekiel.

(20:2-6) God refuses to answer any of their questions, because the people were sinful and God had made up his mind to judge (v.4). The people rebelled despite God’s incredible promises (vv.5-6).

(20:7-9) The people had become idolaters in Egypt for over four centuries before the Exodus. But because God wanted to defend his reputation before the nations (Ex. 7:5; Ps. 106:8-12) and because he wanted to be faithful to the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 15:13-16), God rescued them.

(20:10-12) After God rescued them in the Exodus, he gave them his Law for their good (Lev. 18:5; Deut. 10:12-13). Notice that the people were saved before they were given the Law—not after. God’s salvation from Egypt was based on grace—not law.

(20:13-17) The people rebelled against God’s promises (Num. 11-14) and his law (Ex. 32). So God protected his reputation by bringing judgment in the wilderness. God didn’t annihilate them, because this would communicate that he was too weak or too unloving to protect his people. Moses interceded for the people during this time (Ex. 32:11-14; Num. 14:13-19; Deut. 1:26-40; Ps. 106:23-25).

(20:18-24) The people continued to sin, and God continued to judge and continued to be faithful (Num. 16:21-22; 25:1-9).

(Ezek. 20:25-26) Did God command evil laws?

(20:25) When Ezekiel refers to God giving statutes that were “not good,” this “means that Israel would choose to live according to the world’s ordinances that brought misery and death (cf. 11:12; Lev 26; Deut 28:15-29:19; 2 Kings 17:26-41).”^[79] In other words, God “gave them over” (Rom. 1:24, 26, 28).

(20:26) The “gifts” of the people referred to child sacrifice (Lev. 18:21; Deut. 18:10; 2 Kings 21:6; 2 Chronicles 28:3).

(20:27-29) The people didn’t learn from any of the judgment in the past. They continued to worship idols. This is similar to the people of Ezekiel’s day, who were going through massive judgment, but weren’t learning from it.

(20:30-31) Ezekiel brings the message home to the elders: Are they seriously going to inquire wisdom and guidance from God, when they are still persistently seeking idolatry and sin? Have they learned nothing from their history?

(20:32) God could see into the hearts of the leaders—namely, they still wanted to worship idols and conform to the nations around them.

(20:33-34) God would judge the people (v.33), but he would also restore them (v.34).

(20:35-36) Alexander understands this to refer to the future dispersion in AD 70 under the Romans.^[80]

(20:37) While “passing under the rod” of the shepherd could refer to discipline or judgment (Ps. 89:23; Lam. 3:1), the context reveals that this refers to the shepherd’s care to “bring them into the bond of the covenant.”

(20:38) God’s judgment would result in “purging” those people from the nation who wanted nothing to do with him. Only the faithful followers of God would return.

(20:39) God was allowing them to serve idols, but this would ultimately make the people sick of their idolatry. The net effect would be that the people would be purified of idol worship.

(20:40-41) After God’s discipline, true Temple worship would occur.

(20:42-44) Spiritual renewal would happen during this time. They would see that they were in the wrong, but God was far more gracious than they ever imagined.

(20:45) This section really marks a new thought, and it fits better with chapter 21.

(20:46-49) This is a “parable” (v.49) which is interpreted in Ezekiel 21:1-7. Here, God says that a fire would consume everything from the south to the north, and all people will see what God had done.

Ezekiel 21 (The nation would be judged, but Messiah will come)

Summary: The nation will become ruined, and the kingship will be ended until the true Ruler appears to take the crown (v.27).

(21:1-5) The parable (Ezek. 20:49) was directed at Jerusalem (v.2). The “fire” of the parable (Ezek. 20:47) referred to God’s judgment (v.3). God would use this judgment to separate the righteous from the wicked (v.4), and the nations would see this clearly (v.5).

(21:6-7) God tells Ezekiel to “groan” with “bitter grief” to show the people the reality of the future judgment. The NET renders verse 7 as “every knee will be wet with urine” (v.7).

(21:8-11) Later, we discover that this “sword” is Nebuchadnezzar (vv.18-23).

(21:12) Striking the “thigh” was a sign of grief (cf. Jer. 31:19).^[81]

(21:13) God had promised to discipline the nation with the “rod” if they strayed (2 Sam. 7:14), even though the Davidic Covenant was unconditional and eternal.

(21:14-17) Their were not two or three swords. Rather, the sword’s effectiveness was doubled and tripled.^[82] God approved of this judgment (“I will also clap my hands together”), but his judgment would cease after it was given out (v.17).

(21:18-21) Alexander understands this to be a drawing of a map for Nebuchadnezzar to follow.^[83] Nebuchadnezzar used “divination” to fight his battles (v.21). Of course, this is descriptive—not prescriptive. God no more approved of this than he approved of Nebuchadnezzar’s other sins.

(21:22) Nebuchadnezzar’s divination led him to go to Jerusalem.

(21:23) The people will be shocked that Nebuchadnezzar was attacking them. The expression of “sworn solemn oaths” could refer to (1) the Mosaic covenant or (2) the peace treaties with Babylon. The latter interpretation makes more sense, because the people had already broken the Mosaic covenant.^[84]

(21:24-26) The priesthood would be ended (“Remove the turban,” Ex. 28:4, 37, 39; 29:6; 39:28, 31; Lev. 8:9; 16:4), as well as the kingship (“Take off the crown”). This would result in the social order being overturned (“a ruin, a ruin, a ruin”).

(Ezek. 21:26-27) Who is the “one to whom it belongs” mentioned here?

(21:27) Alexander states that this is “a definite reference to Genesis 49:10 and the king-priest Messiah.”^[85]

(21:28-32) Nebuchadnezzar’s path originally went to Jerusalem, rather than Ammon (v.20). Here, we see that Ammon is not let off the hook. They would be destroyed in due time.

Ezekiel 22 (Judgment on the false leadership: priests, prophets, and princes)

God gets into some of the specifics of their sin, including sexual immorality, theft, ignoring the poor, and child sacrifice. The dross was the leftover scum of purified metal (v.18).

(22:1-2) The reference to the “bloody city” refers to murder.^[86] Blood is repeated throughout this chapter.

(22:3-5) The mixture of “shedding blood” and “idols” could be because their specific form of idolatry resulted in human (child) sacrifice (Ezek. 23:37-39). Consequently, God was going to judge the nation, and the surrounding nations would mock Israel for falling so hard.

The sins of the leaders

(22:6) Manasseh, Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah all shed innocent blood (2 Kin. 21:16; 24:4).

(22:7) The leadership disregarded the importance of parents (Ex. 20:12; Lev. 19:3).

They took advantage of the poor (Ex. 22:21-24; 23:9; Lev. 19:33; Deut. 24:17).

(22:8) They “despised” the Sabbath (Ex. 20:8; Lev. 19:3).

(22:9) They built idols (Deut. 12:1-2; 16:21-22). The used “slanderers” (i.e. informants) to commit premeditated murder (Lev. 19:16; cf. 1 Kin. 21; Jer. 6:28; 9:3).

(22:10-11) They committed various forms of sexual sin (Lev. 18:6-23; 20:10-21).

(22:12) They took bribes to get rich (Ex. 23:8; Deut. 24:6, 10-12; 23:19-20; 27:25; Isa. 1:23, Amos 5:12 Mic 3:11).

The reason for all of this sin was this: “You have forgotten Me.”

Judgment

(22:13-16) God would judge Israel by taking away their stolen money (v.13) and scattering them to the nations.

(22:17-22) In metallurgy, the metal would be heated until it was in liquid form. The “dross” (or impurities) would rise to the top, and the metallurgist would skim these imperfections off the top, making the metal pure.

It isn’t clear if this judgment is for the purpose of disciplining the people and restoring them. Or if they are just being judged retributively.

(22:23-24) God had promised drought if they didn’t follow his covenant (Deut. 28:24).

(22:25) The false prophets weren’t just poor teachers. They were malignantly teaching falsehood, which was costing people their lives.

(22:26) The false priests neglected their duties for money (Mic. 3:11).

(22:27) If the prophets were compared to lions (v.25), the leaders or princes are compared to “wolves” in how they killed and stole money.

(22:28) They used a religious formula (“Thus says the Lord GOD”) to advance their ideas, but this was pure hypocrisy.

(22:29) Finally, the people are held accountable for following this false leaders. We can never say that a “leader told me so.” Each individual person was held personally accountable.

(22:30-31) Moses had been an intercessor for the people before (Ps. 106:23), but there was no one who could stand in the way of God’s judgment now. They were “dead men walking.”

Ezekiel 23 (A tale of two prostitutes)

God gives the illustration of two prostitutes. God married these prostitutes from the start. He describes how many men had used her for prostitution. They are an illustration for Israel’s idolatry.

(23:1-4) This illustration of the two prostitutes (Samaria and Jerusalem) explains how they looked for “security in political alliances with foreign powers,”^[87] specifically Egypt. Ezekiel 16 refers to Israel’s history, while this chapter focuses on her current state.

The were both born of “one mother” because they were originally one nation (under David and Solomon).

Oholah (Samaria) means “her tent.” This could refer to Samaria’s use of “tent shrines” for idol worship.^[88]

Oholibah (Jerusalem) means “my tent is in her.” This might refer to the Temple (or Tabernacle tent).^[89] God’s true “tent” was in Jerusalem—not Samaria.

Samaria’s prostitution (Oholah)

(23:5-8) Alexander comments, “The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III shows Jehu, Israel’s king, bowing in submission to Shalmaneser III and giving tribute to him as was the custom. Not only did Israel submit to political alliances with Assyria, but she likewise defiled herself by going after the idols and gods of Assyria.”^[90]

(23:9-10) The northern kingdom’s judgment occurred at the hands of the Assyrians in 722 BC.

Jerusalem’s prostitution (Oholibah)

(23:11-13) Jerusalem first took alliances with Assyria.

(23:14-16) This likely the ambassadors of Jerusalem seeing the city’s power inscribed on Babylonian walls.^[91] Consequently, they wanted to be rich and powerful like the Babylonians.

(23:17) This might refer to how Jerusalem turned away from Babylon to Egypt.^[92]

(23:18-19) God was equally “disgusted” with Jerusalem (cf. v.17). Instead of turning back to him, the people turned to Egypt (v.19). Alexander writes, “It was like striking up an old relationship.”^[93]

(23:20) The NET renders this verse: “She lusted after their genitals—as large those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.”

(23:21) The people returned to Egypt for protection, but God viewed this as prostitution.

(23:22-31) God would use Jerusalem’s “lovers” (v.22) to bring judgment. The reference to cutting off her “nose” and “ears” might refer to exile, where the Babylonians would march exiles with metal hooks in their noses.

(23:32-34) The “cup” refers to God’s wrath (Mt. 20:22; 26:39; Rev. 14:10). The “lovers” of Jerusalem had fondled her “breasts,” but now, Jerusalem would “tear her breasts” (v.34).

(23:35) The reason for all of this immorality was the fact that they had “forgotten” God.

Judgment

(23:36-39) The people performed child sacrifice in the “sanctuary” or Temple of the Lord!—and they did this on the Sabbath.

(23:40-42) Political alliances like this were forbidden (Deut. 17:14-20). These “drunkards” likely refer to the “Arabians, Moabites, Edomites or Sabeans.”^[94]

(23:43-47) The punishment for adultery like this was stoning (Ex. 21:2; Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22). This is metaphorical for judgment.

(23:48-49) The result of this judgment would put an end to idolatry.

Ezekiel 24 (Ezekiel’s wife dies)

Summary: Babylon had surrounded Jerusalem (v.2). Ezekiel describes Israel as a meal in a cooking pot. Ezekiel’s wife died (v.18). This was probably a mercy, because it happened before the capture of Jerusalem.

(24:1-2) This date (Jan. 15, 588 BC) was the very day Nebuchadnezzar began his siege against Jerusalem.^[95]

Parable of the boiling pot of meat

(24:3) This parable was given to the “rebellious” people of Israel.

(24:4-5) The parable describes boiling meat and bones in a pot. But what does this mean? Ezekiel explains…

(24:6) The “pot” is Jerusalem—the “city of bloodshed.”

(24:7-8) The bloodshed would not be “covered” or “atoned for” (cf. Gen. 4:10; Isa. 26:12).^[96] Alexander comments, “The Lord declared that he had put Jerusalem’s blood on the bare rock and would not allow it to be covered so that his wrath might be poured out on her.”^[97]

(24:9-12) The burning of the bones (i.e. Siege of Jerusalem) was to purify the people.

(24:13-14) God’s earlier cleansing refers to the earlier deportations by the Babylonians (605 BC and 597 BC). God would come back for a final deportation.

Ezekiel’s wife dies

(24:15-17) God took the life of Ezekiel’s wife—perhaps with a plague or disease.^[98] Why wasn’t he allowed to mourn or weep? Doesn’t this seem cruel? Alexander comments, “This was certainly an unnatural response to death, especially in the culture of Ezekiel’s day. Priests mourned the death of a family member (Lev 21:1-3), but Ezekiel would not even be allowed that privilege.”^[99]

(24:18-19) The people were just as complexed about this as we are today (v.19). Why was Ezekiel told not to mourn?

Explanation

(24:20-24) Like the other dramatic acts that Ezekiel did, this prophetic drama served to show the people that they should not mourn over the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Because God was bringing a just judgment, the people shouldn’t mourn over what God was doing. By mourning, they would be disagreeing with God’s justice. Instead of mourning over justice, they should’ve really mourned over their sin.

(24:25-27) Ezekiel had been made mute (Ezek. 3:25-27). Here, God tells him that he will be able to speak once the siege was finished. This would be fulfilled in Ezekiel 33:21-22.

Judgment for the Nations (Chs. 25-33)

The first 24 chapters concerned God’s judgment for Jerusalem. In this section (chs. 25-33), Ezekiel pronounces judgment for the nations that reveled in Jerusalem’s destruction and took their wickedness too far. This also confirms the Abrahamic Covenant that God would curse the nations who cursed Israel (Gen. 12:3). In Ezekiel 33:21 (until the end of the book), Ezekiel again focuses on Israel and her restoration.

Ezekiel 25 (Judgment for the nations)

Summary: God speaks against the Pagan nations for their brutality against Israel. He speaks against Ammon (v.2), Moab (v.8), Edom (v.14), and Philistia (v.15).

Judgment for Ammon

The Ammonites came from Lot’s incestuous impregnating of his two daughters (Gen. 19:30-38).

(25:1-3) The Ammonites were judged because they reveled in Jerusalem’s destruction.

(25:4) The “sons of the east” are not explicitly identified. However, parallel passages and history tell us that Babylon conquered Ammon. Josephus writes, “When they were there, God signified to the prophet that the king of Babylon was about making an expedition against the Egyptians, and commanded him to foretell to the people that Egypt should be taken, and the king of Babylon should slay some of them, and should take others captive, and bring them to Babylon; which things came to pass accordingly; for on the fifth year after the destruction of Jerusalem, which was the twenty-third of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, he made an expedition against Celesyria; and when he had possessed himself of it, he made war against the Ammonites and Moabites” (Antiquities, 10.180-181). This took place five years after the destruction of Jerusalem in 581 BC.^[100]

(25:5) “Rabbah” was the capital of Ammon.

(25:6-7) God judged them because they celebrated Israel’s destruction. As a result of their judgment, they would know that Yahweh was real.

Judgment for Moab and Edom

The Moabites came from Lot’s incestuous impregnating of his oldest daughter (Gen. 19:30-38).

(25:8) Even though God had chosen Israel as his special nation (Gen. 12:1-3; Ex. 19:5-6; Deut. 7:6-8), the Moabites considered them just “like all the nations.” They had taunted Israel as a common nation—not a chosen one (Jer. 48:27; Zeph. 2:8-9). Alexander writes, “The Mesha Stone recounts the king of Moab’s boast that his god Chemosh had vanquished Israel (Prichard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, pp. 320-21).”^[101]

“Seir” is another name for Edom (Gen. 32:3; 36:30; Ezek. 35).

(25:9) Beth Jeshimoth was in the Jordan Valley. Baal Meon was about five miles southwest of Madebah. The location of Kiriathaim is uncertain.^[102]

(25:10) The “sons of the east” refers to the Babylonians, who attacked Moab in 582 BC.^[103] They aren’t “remembered” until the end of history (Isa. 11:14).

(25:11) The result of this judgment would be that the people who know that Yahweh is real.

Judgment for Edom

The Edomites had come from Esau, and they were rivals with Israel/Jacob (Gen. 25:30; 27:41-46; 32:4).

(25:12-13) Edom wanted Israel’s land (Ezek. 35:10), and they had boasted over Israel’s fall (Ezek. 36:5; Ps. 137:1, 7-9). Teman and Dedan are not known today, but they likely were on the boundaries of Edom’s land based on their description (v.13).^[104]

(25:14) Once again, they were judged in order that they would know that Yahweh was real.

Judgment for Philistia

(25:15) The Philistines wanted to outright destroy Israel. They had been attempting this for centuries: Samson (Judg. 13-16), Eli (1 Sam. 4), Saul (1 Sam. 13; 31), David (2 Sam. 5), Hezekiah (2 Kin. 18:8), Jehoram (2 Chron. 21:16-17), and Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:18).

(25:16) The “Cherethites” were synonymous for the Philistines, where a part equals the whole (synecdoche).^[105]

(25:17) The ultimate destruction of Philistia will occur at the end of history (Isa. 11:14; Joel 3:1-4; Obad. 19; Zeph. 2:4-7).

Judgment for Egypt (Chs. 26-28)

Ezekiel 26 (Judgment against Tyre)

God speaks judgment against Tyre for three chapters (chs. 26-28). He promises that it will never be rebuilt.

(26:1) This prophecy dates to 587/586 BC.^[106]

(26:2) Tyre wanted to benefit commercially off of Jerusalem’s fall.^[107] Solomon writes, “He who rejoices at calamity will not go unpunished” (Prov. 17:5). The next section explains the judgment of Tyre.

(Ezek. 26:3-14) Was this prophecy fulfilled?

(26:3) “Many nations” would attack Tyre—not just Babylon (v.3, 5).

“As the sea brings up its waves.” This implies that wave after wave of nations would come against Tyre.

(26:4) The city would be “scraped” as clean as a “bare rock.”

(26:5) The city would be thrown into the sea (“She will be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea”).

(26:6) The “daughters” of Tyre refers to the city’s “coastal settlements.”^[108]

Babylon attacked Tyre under King Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (586-573).^[109] Persia later attacked Tyre.^[110] Greece attacked Tyre under Alexander the Great. Later the Selecuids (under Antiochus III), then the Romans, and finally the Saracens (4^th c. AD) attacked the city. This explains the “waves” of “nations” who would attack Tyre (v.3).

(26:7-11) At first, Nebuchadnezzar would attack the city, laying siege to it.

(26:12-14) Notice the shift from the second person (“he”) to the third person (“they”). This section includes the “many nations” mentioned at the beginning of the chapter (v.3, 5), which forms a literary chiasm. The rest of the content supports a literary chiasm, mentioning the “bare rock” (v.4) and “the spreading of nets” (v.5).

(26:15-18) The neighboring nations will lament over the fall of Tyre.

(26:19-21) The final judgment of Tyre would be that it would be covered by the waters—buried beneath the sea.

Ezekiel 27 (More judgment of Tyre)

(27:1-3) Pride and vanity kept the city from seeking God (Prov. 8:13; Ps. 10:4).

(27:4-7) Tyre is compared to a ship, because it was a seaport and trade city. By listing all of the materials of this exquisite and beautiful “ship,” Ezekiel is showing that the various nations made Tyre beautiful and wealthy.^[111]

(27:8-9) These nations were known for their expert sailors.^[112]

(27:10-11) These nations were there to protect Tyre’s business.

(27:12-25) By listing all of these regions, we see that Tyre traded with just about everyone in the ancient Near East. Alexander comments, “When these various places are located on a map of the ancient Near East, it can be seen that Tyre traded with almost every region: from Tarshish (Spain) to northeast Anatolia (Tubal, Beth Togarmah) on an east-west axis (through the Aegean), and from Arabia through Syria and Palestine on a north-south axis.”^[113]

(27:26) The “east wind” likely refers to Babylonia.^[114]

(27:27) The city will fall hard.

(27:28-34) The people who grew rich off of Tyre were shocked by her fall. Materialists are always shocked when their stocks plummet (cf. Rev. 18).

(27:35-36) In the end, the people turned on Tyre (“appalled at you” “hiss at you”). It could be that they were angry at losing their money, or perhaps, they wanted to gain favor with the new reigning empire.

Concluding insights

There is a lot to ponder about the transitory nature of materialism in this chapter. These traders must have known that their wealth would not last forever, and yet they seem totally blindsided. For the Christian, death takes all of our material goods and success.

Ezekiel 28 (Judgment for the Leader of Tyre, the King of Tyre, and Sidon)

Summary: The first part of this passage refers to the human king or “leader” of Tyre. The second part refers to the spiritual being behind Tyre (Satan). God then speaks against Sidon (v.21).

(Ezek. 28:1ff) Does this passage describe Satan or the prince of Tyre?

Judgment for Sidon

(28:20-24) Sidon was the sister city of Tyre—though they weren’t as prosperous as Tyre. The section of judgment is far shorter compared to Tyre probably because Tyre was such a greater city.

(28:25-26) The judgment for the nations was a message of peace for the exiles. After the regathering, the nations would be judged, but the people of Israel would live “securely.” Ezekiel returns to the subject of Israel’s regathering in chapters 33-39.

Judgment for Egypt (Chs. 29-32)

This section concludes the judgment for the nations. Ezekiel concludes with six messages of judgment for Egypt. Egypt fell to the Babylonians in 609 BC.^[115]

Ezekiel 29 (More judgment on Egypt)

Summary: God speaks against Egypt (v.2). He describes the Pharaoh as a hooked fish (v.4). He predicts a destruction of Egypt for 40 years (v.12). Nebuchadnezzar attacks Tyre, but he didn’t capture it (v.18). So God gives him Egypt instead (v.19).

(29:1) This oracle dates to 587 BC.

(29:2) This judgment wasn’t just for the Pharaoh, but for the entire nation.

(29:3-4) The term “monster” (tannîm) can also be translated as “crocodile.” This creature is described as having “scales” (v.4), and crocodiles were well known to the Egyptians. Moreover, the Egyptians hunted crocodiles by hooking their jaws (v.4; Herodotus 2.70).

“My Nile is mine, and I myself have made it.” The Pharaoh had delusions of grandeur. He thought that he was the Creator—not god.

(29:5) Pharaohs greatly valued a formal, religious burial; therefore, this death would be a horrific judgment to the Pharaoh of Egypt.^[116]

(29:6-7) This powerful nation was no more than a “staff made of reed.” That is, they were weak.

(29:8-9) God was bringing the “sword” (i.e. judgment) on the nation.

(29:10) These cities were “ancient Egypt’s northern and southern boundaries.”^[117]

(29:11-12) We do not have extrabiblical confirmation of this 40 year exile, but Alexander comments that this “most certainly took place at the hands of the Babylonians.”^[118] The nation fell in 568 BC, and Persia took over after the Babylonians. The Persian practice was typically “to return many peoples displaced by the Babylonians,”^[119] which would fit with this prediction.

(29:13-16) In Endless Hope or Hopeless End (2016), pp.47-49, we note how this prophecy was fulfilled in detail.

(29:17) This dates to 571 BC.

(29:18) The reference to “bald” and “bare” heads “indicates that they were carrying heavy loads on their heads and shoulders during the siege.”^[120]

(29:19-20) Josephus records that the Babylonians conquered Egypt (Antiquities, 10.180-182).

(29:21) The reference to the “horn sprout” refers to the encouragement for Israel during the Exile, as they saw Egypt judged.^[121]

Ezekiel 30 (God judges Egypt through Nebuchadnezzar)

God is going to conquer Egypt through Nebuchadnezzar. He promises to disperse Egypt to the nations.

(30:1-3) The “day of the LORD” (v.9) is said to be for the “nations” (plural). Some take this to be referring to the end of history. However, later, this day is localized, being called the “day of Egypt” (v.9).

(30:4-5) Many of the nations will fall alongside Egypt. That is why “nations” (plural) are mentioned in verse 3.

(30:6) These were the borders of Egypt (cf. Ezek. 29:10).

(30:7-19) The judgment will be brutal for Egypt, and Babylon will be the agent of judgment (v.10).

(30:20) This vision was given in 587 BC.

(30:21-22) The symbol of a Pharaoh with massive biceps was a common image of strength at this time for the Egyptians.^[122] This is why God picks the breaking of the Pharaoh’s arms as an image for his destruction.

(30:23-27) By contrast, God would strengthen Nebuchadnezzar’s arms to defeat Egypt, dispersing the people.

Ezekiel 31 (Assyria’s fall is compared to Egypt’s fall)

Assyria was put down because it tried to compare to God’s plan on its own (v.10).

(31:1) This prophecy was delivered in 587 BC.^[123]

(31:2-3) Ezekiel compares Assyria to a gigantic tree.

(31:4) This could be a reference to the great Tigris and Euphrates.^[124]

(31:5-6) It seems that the “birds” are synonymous to the “nations” (Dan. 4:10-12, 19-22; Mt. 13:31-32).

(31:7-9) This use of “God’s garden” and “the trees of Eden” is metaphorical. After all, the context describes a tree climbing up past the clouds in the sky, and its branches cover the nations of the Earth.

(31:10) Assyria fell because of its pride (Prov. 16:18).

(31:11) Assyria was handed over to Babylon to be judged.

(31:12) The nations that took refuge under Assyria would abandon it like rats from a sinking ship.

(31:13-17) The other nations also would face a similar judgment.

(31:18) Alexander comments, “If God brought Assyria down, Egypt could be certain that she, who had never come close to Assyria’s greatness, would also fall.”^[125]

Ezekiel 32 (More judgment for Egypt)

(32:1) This dates to March of 585 BC.^[126]

(32:2-4) Pharaoh’s estimation of himself was much higher than the actual reality. He thought he was a “lion,” but he was just as crocodile who would be captured, killed, and left for the animals to eat.

(32:5-6) This must be hyperbolic language which describes the nation’s “flesh” and “blood” filling the ravines and mountains.

(32:7-8) The “darkness” would show that “Egypt’s great sun gods were impotent to help.”^[127]

(32:9-10) The surrounding nations will be appalled at Egypt’s judgment.

(32:11-16) Egypt’s judgment would come at the hand of Babylon (v.11). The Babylonian “tyrants” would destroy the people and animals (vv.12-13).

(32:17) This was given in the next month of April of 585 BC.^[128]

(32:18-32) This concludes Ezekiel’s prophecies of judgment against the nations. He pronounces judgment on Egypt (v.18), Assyria (v.22), Elam (v.24), Meshech (v.26), Tubal (v.26), Edom (v.29), and Sidon (v.30).

Ezekiel 33 (Ezekiel: the watchman)

Summary: There was a warning for the people. The watchman was typically responsible for protecting the people, and God calls Ezekiel a watchman in this sense. God wants the people to repent (v.11). Later, the city was destroyed (v.21).

(33:1) This prophecy was given to the people of Israel.

(33:2-5) In ancient times, the “watchman” would sound the alarm if the city was being invaded. If the people didn’t respond to the watchman, then it was their own fault.

(33:6) If the watchman doesn’t sound the alarm, then the blood of the people is on his hands.

(33:7-9) God uses this ancient convention as an illustration for Ezekiel’s role in Israel. Ezekiel was Israel’s watchman. If Ezekiel didn’t warn the people, the blood was on his hands (v.8). If he did warn them, then they were responsible for ignoring him (v.9).

(33:10-11) The people realized the gravity of their sins, and they wanted to know what to do (v.10). In chapter 18, they blamed their parents, but here, they blamed themselves. God tells them that He doesn’t want to judge them, but rather, he wants them to turn from their sins to avoid judgment (v.11). Alexander writes, “Ezekiel gave one final warning to the exiles: Turn now to the Lord! Why die?”^[129]

(33:12-16) If wicked people turn toward to God, they will be spared. If righteous people turn away from God, they will be judged.

(33:17-20) The people were complaining that God wasn’t just (v.17). This could be in the sense that they “wanted to put the godless on the same level as the righteous.”^[130] but God claims that they are the ones in the wrong.

(33:21) This dates to 586 BC.^[131]

(33:22) Ezekiel’s 7.5 years of being mute was over (Ezek. 3:24-27).

(33:23-24) The people were banking on the Abrahamic Covenant to possess the land.

(33:25-26) While the Abrahamic Covenant is unconditional for the nation, individuals could be disciplined out of the land because they had disobeyed the Mosaic Covenant.

(33:27-29) God would bring judgment on that generation to show them how much they needed to obey his terms.

(33:30-32) The people used to gossip and mock Ezekiel’s prophecies (v.30), and they wouldn’t act on what he said (v.31). They were devoted in what they said, but not in what they did (v.32). Alexander writes, “To them Ezekiel was no more than a good entertainer. He was amusing to listen to and to watch, with all his symbolic acts and prophecies. But just as an entertainer demands no response, so they did not sense a need to respond to Ezekiel’s messages.”^[132]

(33:33) When Ezekiel’s short term prophecies came to pass, they would realize their fatal flaw.

The Future of Israel (Chs. 34-39)

The judgment for Israel and the nations is over. Here, Ezekiel turns to the future of the nation.

Ezekiel 34 (The evil shepherds of Israel)

Summary: God is angry with the false shepherds of Israel. Notice that Yahweh is speaking in the first person throughout this section (“I will…”). This is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus (Jn. 10:11).

(34:1-3) The shepherds stand for the leaders of Israel. They were profiting off of leadership, rather than being servant leaders: “Instead of feeding the flock, they fed on the flock.”^[133]

(34:4) Instead of healing the people (sheep), they “dominated” them.

(34:5-6) The lack of quality leadership led to them being scattered in the Exile (Jer. 23:9-10).

(34:7-10) God formally accuses and renders judgment on the shepherds.

(34:11-16) Yahweh God replaces the false leaders as the true shepherd (cf. Ps. 23). This becomes powerful to consider when Jesus claimed to be the “good shepherd” (Jn. 10:7-11).

(34:17-22) The fat and lean sheep represent the leaders who grew fat off of the sheep. God himself would judge them.

(34:23-24) This is a messianic reference. First, the expression “My servant David” is a common reference to the Messiah.^[134] Second, other OT authors referred to the Messiah as the true shepherd of Israel (cf. Ezek. 37:24-25; Jer. 23:5-6; 30:9; Hos. 3:5). Third, Jesus called himself the “good shepherd” (Jn. 10:11), who would “lay down his life for the sheep.” Instead of exploiting the sheep, he would sacrifice for them.

(34:25-31) Alexander does not equate the “covenant of peace” with the new covenant.^[135] Instead, in his view, this occurs after the time of Christ, when the nations (“beasts”) would be kicked out of Israel (v.25, 27-29). It would result in a blessing for the crops (vv.26-27). The nation would come collectively to God and know him deeply.

Ezekiel 35 (The end of Edom)

He promises to destroy Mount Seir.

(35:1-3) “Mount Seir” refers to Edom (Gen. 36:30; 2 Chron. 20:10; 25:11). God picks Edom as the epitome of the nations who hated Israel.

Remember, the divide between Israel and Edom started with Jacob and Esau (Gen. 25, 27). The Edomites tried to stop the people from entering the Promised Land (Num. 20:14-21; 24:15-19). The Edomites continued to hate the Israelites throughout their history (Mal. 1:2-5). The Edomites aided the Babylonians in conquering Israel (Ps. 137:7; Lam. 4:21-22; Obad. 10-14).

(35:4) This explains why God would judge them so severely.

(35:5) The Edomites had a long history of hatred against the Jewish people (“everlasting enmity”).

(35:6-10) God would judge Edom because of their violence and hatred.

(35:11-15) God would judge Edom for trying to take over the Promised Land for themselves.

Ezekiel 36 (Restoration of Israel)

Summary: God promises to restore Israel. God promises that this will be a permanent restoration (v.12). He would restore them from all the nations (v.24). There will be a spiritual restoration after this regathering (vv.26-27). He won’t do this for their righteousness (v.32).

(36:1-4) The nations thought that the land of Israel belonged to them.

(36:5-7) Based on the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12:3), God would protect Israel from the nations.

(36:8) God would multiply the trees on the mountains (v.8), the people (v.10), and the cities (v.10).

(36:11) This language is reminiscent of Genesis 1:28 (“Be fruitful and multiply”). The state of Israel in the future will be better than its earlier state.

(36:12) At this point, the people of Israel would continue to have children on the land.

(36:13-14) The insult of being childless refers to the “many horrible misfortunes Israel had experienced.”^[136]

(36:15) After this point, the people wouldn’t be insulted or ever cease to be a nation.

(36:16-18) The people of Israel were kicked out of their land because of idolatry and murder (to name a couple reasons). Ezekiel compared these actions to a woman on her menstrual cycle (Ezek. 18:6; 22:10; Lev. 12:2-5; 15:19-30).

(36:19) This is why the people were scattered.

(36:20-21) God’s reputation was on the line among the nations. If Israel was God’s chosen nation, the nations would expect God to treat the nation with protection.

(36:22-23) Alexander comments, “In OT times one’s name and person were equivalent; a name represented the person.”^[137]

(36:24) Moses predicted this regathering after the Exile around 900 years earlier (Deut. 29:1-30:10).

(36:25-27) To be “sprinkled clean” likely refers to forgiveness—though normally blood is mentioned (Ex. 12:22; Lev. 14:4-7; 49:53; Ps. 51:7; 1 Cor. 6:11). This must refer to the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34). The receiving of the “Spirit” also fits with the New Covenant.

(36:28-32) These events must refer to the regathering of Israel at the end of history. Alexander rightly comments that the “details of Israel’s reestablishment on her land set forth above simply did not occur in the returns under Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah.”^[138]

(36:33-35) The reference to “Eden” shows that this would be a sort of “paradise regained.”^[139]

(36:36-38) The nations would know that God was behind this miraculous regathering and revitalizing of Israel.

Ezekiel 37 (The Valley of Bones: The Regathering of Israel)

Summary: God gives Ezekiel an object-lesson of bones in the valley. The bones are reanimated slowly, and then spiritually renewed (vv.9-10). God tells them that this is the nation of Israel (v.11). The people will believe that they are cut off from God’s promise (v.11), but God disagrees (v.12). God promises a permanent restoration of a united kingdom (v.22). This will last “forever” (v.26, 28).

The vision is given

(37:1-2) This could be the same “valley” of his vision in Ezekiel 1.^[140]

(37:3) Looking at the valley of bones, Ezekiel didn’t know if God would bring them to life or not.

(37:4-10) The bones gain physical life and flesh before they gain spiritual life and flesh. This could imply that regathering of Israel would be first national, and then spiritual.^[141] This fits with the creation of the first humans (Gen. 2:7).

The vision is explained

(Ezek. 37:11-25) Does this passage predict the modern regathering of Israel?

See also Endless Hope or Hopeless End (2016), pp. 33-41, for an exegesis of the importance passages and a fuller development of this prediction as an apologetic.

(37:11) The bones are the “whole house of Israel.” They were “dry”—meaning, they were dead for a long time. Their “hope had perished”—meaning, they had given up faith. They were “cut off”—meaning, they were separated from each other.

(37:12-14) This is both a regathering and a resurrection of the people.

(37:15-20) The two sticks represented the two nations of Israel: Judah (southern kingdom) and Israel (northern kingdom). By combining them together, this meant a reunification of the nation into one.

(37:21) The Jewish people would be gathered from all of the nations into Israel.

(37:22) “One king” would rule over the “one nation.” This king would be “David” (i.e. the Messiah, v.24).

(37:23) The nation would experience a freedom from idolatry.

(37:24) The combination of “servant” with “David” seems to conflate the Suffering Servant (Isa. 42, 49, 50, 53) with the Conquering King.

(37:25-28) Once this all occurs, the Jewish people would be in the land “forever” (v.25), and the Temple would be there “forever” (v.26). Clearly, this hasn’t been fulfilled yet.

Ezekiel 38 (The Battle(s) of Armageddon)

Summary: God speaks against Gog and Magog (v.3). He will bring them to Israel (v.4). They develop an evil plot to kill Israel (v.10). They will attack Israel (v.16), but God will create an earthquake (v.19). He will bring judgment on Gog and Magog and the other nations (v.22).

For a thorough exegesis and explanation of these two chapters, see Endless Hope or Hopeless End (2016), pp. 212-224.

(Ezek. 38:4) Will God cause evil to happen in Israel?

Who or what is “Gog”? Besides Ezekiel 38-39, the OT only mentions “Gog” in 1 Chronicles 5:4. Ezekiel calls Gog the “prince of Rosh” (Ezek. 38:2; 38:2), so a person might be in view, who rules these other nations. Though Gog’s identity is not certain,^[142] Allen writes that Gog “seems to relate to one known to the Greeks as Gyges and to the Assyrians as Gugu, who was a powerful king of Lydia in west Asia Minor in the first half of the seventh century. As with the national names, so here a great figure of the past is evidently used to define a future threat, as we might speak fearfully of a new Hitler.”^[143] Daniel Block concurs that “the most likely explanation derives Gog from Gyges (668-631 BC).”^[144] While Yamauchi associates Gog with the kingdom of Gyges, he writes, “Various attempts to explain the background of Gog and Magog have not won universal consent.”^[145]

Since the Assyrian “Gugu” rebelled against the empire and was quickly killed, Duguid doesn’t see him as a major historical figure, describing him as “mere roadkill on the highway of the empire.”^[146] Instead, Duguid contends that Ezekiel is not focusing on the historical importance of Gog, but rather the character or nature of this man. Herodotus tells us that Gugu (Gog) took the throne from his master by killing him.^[147] Thus Duguid writes, “The Gog of Ezekiel transcends historical categories and takes on mythical proportions, rather like the figure of Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie The Terminator.”^[148] In other words, the reference to “Gog” might be symbolic for a future tyrant, who sadistically takes control of these other kings and rulers.

Assessment: The location of Gog is not certain. This nation must be to the north of Israel (Ezek. 38:15). If we associate it with the Greek (Gyges) and Assyrian (Gugu), this would place Gog in modern-day Turkey. It’s also possible that Ezekiel is only thinking of a man—not a nation—when he refers to Gog.

What is Magog? Josephus states that the ancient Scythians lived in Magog.^[149] This would place Magog in “a mountainous region around the Black and Caspian seas.”^[150] Yamauchi states, “In the broad sense the word Scythian can designate some of the many other tribes in the vast steppes of Russia, stretching from the Ukraine in the west to the region of Siberia in the east.”^[151]

Assessment: Magog can be identified with the region around the Black Sea in the broad area of Russia. Garland notes that “this position is generally accepted.”^[152]

What is Rosh? Considerable debate has surrounded identifying Rosh. Some Dispensational authors assumed that Rosh should be identified with “Russia.” The arguments given were often based on the word association between “Rosh” and “Russia.” However, more recently, other evangelical authors have dismissed this assertion. Because so much debate surrounds the identity of Rosh, we will consider this question carefully.

Should “Rosh” be understood as a proper noun or as an adjective? Modern English translations disagree on whether to take “Rosh” as a proper noun (i.e. the title of a nation) or as an adjective (i.e. the description of Gog). When we compare translations, we discover that the NASB, NKJV, and ASV render this Hebrew word as a proper noun (“Rosh”), while the KJV, ESV, NIV, NRSV, NLT, and NET translate it as an adjective (“prince” or “ruler” of the nations).^[153] The case for translating Rosh as a proper noun can be soundly supported for a number of reasons.

First, Hebrew grammarians understand Rosh as a proper noun.^[154] For instance, Wilhelm Gesenius is “generally considered by modern Hebrew scholars to have been one of the greatest scholars of the Hebrew language.”^[155] Gesenius writes that Rosh is a “proper noun of a northern nation, mentioned with Meshech and Tubal; undoubtedly the Russians, who are mentioned by the Byzantine writers of the tenth century, under the name the Ros, dwelling to the north of Taurus… as dwelling on the river Rha (Wolga).”^[156] Billington writes, “The grammatical arguments for the translation of ‘Rosh’ as a proper noun in Ezekiel 38-39 are conclusive and not really open for serious debate… Few Hebrew scholars today maintain that Rosh in Ezekiel 38-39 should be translated as ‘chief.’”^[157]

Second, ancient Greek translations render this Hebrew term as a proper noun—not an adjective. The Septuagint, Symmachus, and Theodotian (other ancient Greek translations of the OT) rendered Rosh as a place or nation—not a title.^[158]

Third, Jerome’s translation of the Latin Vulgate erroneously popularized the adjectival translation. Jerome couldn’t identify the Rosh people, so he went against grammatical rules to render Rosh as an adjective.^[159] As a result, Jerome’s translation greatly influenced the King James Bible of 1611, and other English translations have (erroneously) followed in this tradition.

Is there any historical connection between Rosh and modern-day Russia? Many scholars claim that no connection exists between Rosh and Russia historically or etymologically. For instance, the eminent historian Edwin Yamauchi writes, “[Rosh] can have nothing to do with modern ‘Russia.’ This would be a gross anachronism, for the modern name is based upon the name Rus, which was brought into the region of Kiev, north of the Black Sea, by the Vikings only in the Middle Ages.”^[160]

On the other hand, in his three part journal article series, scholar Clyde Billington offers a different perspective. He notes that identifying the Rosh people is difficult because different cultures spelled and pronounced this term differently. Moreover, the Rosh people were nomadic, travelling from place to place, so it’s difficult to locate them precisely.^[161] Nevertheless, Billington offers several lines of evidence that place the Rosh people in modern-day Russia:

Many ancient historical sources identify Rosh. Remember, since the Rosh people were nomadic, we shouldn’t expect them to stay in the same geographic location. This is why we find them appearing in multiple areas:

(1) Ancient Egyptian inscriptions (~2,600 BC) identify a place called “Rash,” but these sources do not give us a location.^[162]

(2) The Hatshepsut’s inscription (~1500 BC) refers to “Reshu,” located to the north of Egypt. Billington states that this inscription “is almost certainly to be identified with the name ‘Rosh’ mentioned in Ezekiel 38-39.”^[163] This would place Rosh in northern Egypt—south of Israel.

(3) The Eblaites, Ugarites, Hittites, and Assyrians all mention a city called “‘ursbu/ Rish/ Urash’ located somewhere in northwest Syria. It is very likely that the name of this city is directly connected to the name Rosh mentioned in Ezekiel 38-39.”^[164] Billington adds, “There is even one cuneiform document from the reign of the Assyrian King Sargon II (ruled 722-705 B.C.) which actually names all three peoples [Rosh, Meshech, Tubal] mentioned by Ezekiel 38-39.”^[165] He notes, “Assyrian documents from the 9th-7th centuries B.C. mention a group of Rosh people living in Mesopotamia to the east of the Tigris River.”^[166]

(4) The Rosh people lived in the Caucasus Mountains. Billington notes, “There is solid evidence linking one group of Rosh People to the Caucasus Mountains.”^[167] He adds, “It should be noted that there were also bands of Meshech, Tubal, and Rosh peoples living in or north of the Caucasus Mountains in what is today Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia.”^[168]

(5) Later, Byzantine Christians placed the Rosh people in Russia. Billington writes, “As early as 438 AD, Byzantine Christians placed Gog, Magog, Meshech, Tubal and Ros peoples to the north of Greece in the area that is today Russia.”^[169]

Historians dispute how far back the term “Russian” existed. Some hold that it only goes back as far as the ninth century AD with the Varangian Rus people. However, these people adopted this name from the preexistent people who lived there.^[170] Billington concludes that given the nomadic nature of the Rosh people, they started in the Caucasus Mountains, but spread to India and Eastern Mesopotamia. A group in the sixth century was in the north of the Black Sea in Ukraine.^[171]

Biblical evidence supports the existence of an ancient nation that eventually became Rosh. Genesis 10:2 identifies the sons of Japheth with “Gomer and Magog… Tubal and Meshech and Tiras,” which later grew into nations. This passage mentions all of the major nations from Ezekiel 38, but what about “Rosh”? Billington links “Tiras” with “Rosh,” noting that the ancient Akkadian language dropped “t” sounds when these preceded “r” sounds, leaving us with “Ras.”^[172] Of course, when Ezekiel wrote his book, he was captive in Babylon (which spoke Akkadian), so it would make sense for him to call this nation “Rosh” rather than “Tiras.”

The book of Judges references the Cushan-rishathaim (of Mesopotamia), who conquered the Jewish people temporarily. These people connect us with the Egyptian texts mentioned earlier. Billington writes, “There are strong reasons for identifying the ‘country of Reshet’ and the ‘land of Reshu’ mentioned in New Kingdom Egyptian texts with the country of the Rishataim people mentioned in Judges 3:8-11. There are also strong reasons for identifying the Reshu/Rishataim people with the ruling class of Indo-Aryans in the Kingdom of Mitanni.”^[173]

Assessment: There are overwhelming reasons for taking Rosh as a proper noun—not an adjective. As to the location of these people, we are not certain. However, several lines of evidence would point toward modern-day Russia.

What are Meshech & Tubal? Ezekiel 27:13 states that Meshech and Tubal were trading partners with Tyre (in modern-day Lebanon). Alexander writes, “The biblical and extrabiblical data, though sparse, would imply that Meshech and Tubal refer to geographical areas or countries in eastern modern Turkey, southwest of Russia and northwest of Iran.”^[174] Mark Hitchcock,^[175] Leslie Allen,^[176] and John Gammie^[177] all agree with this identification of Meshech and Tubal.

Some Dispensational authors still believe that Meshech and Tubal should be identified with Moscow and Tobolsk—two major cities of Russia. However, Alexander writes, “There is no etymological, grammatical, historical, or literary data in support of such a position.”^[178]

Assessment: Meshech and Tubal can be identified with modern-day Turkey.

What is Persia? Scholars overwhelmingly agree that Persia later became the modern state of Iran. Hitchcock writes, “The ancient land of Persia became the modern nation of Iran in March 1935, and then the name was changed to the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979.”^[179]

Assessment: Persia can be identified with modern-day Iran.

What is Cush? Alexander,^[180] Block,^[181] and Garland^[182] identify Cush with Ethiopia and Nubia. Hitchcock writes, “Ancient Cush was called Kusu by the Assyrians and Babylonians, Kos or Kas by the Egyptians, and Nubia by the Greeks. Secular history locates Cush directly south of ancient Egypt, extending south past the modern city of Khartoum, which is the capital of modern Sudan. Thus, modern Sudan inhabits the ancient land of Cush.”^[183] Sudan is the largest African nation (26 million in population), and currently holds firm alliances with Iran (Persia).

Assessment: Cush can be identified with Sudan or its neighbor Ethiopia.

What is Put? Garland states that Put is “normally identified as Libya or some African country.”^[184] Hitchcock writes, “From the Babylonian Chronicles, tablets that recorded ancient Babylonian history, it appears that Put was the ‘distant’ land to the west of Egypt, which would be modern-day Libya and could possibly include nations farther west such as modern Algeria and Tunisia. The Septuagint renders the word Put as Libues.”^[185]

Assessment: Put can be identified with modern-day Libya, or possibly Algeria and Tunisia.

What is Gomer? Allen identifies Gomer with the ancient Cimmerians,^[186] as does Alexander,^[187] Block,^[188] Yamauchi,^[189] and Garland.^[190] Homer located the Cimmerians with the “Crimean peninsula on the north shore of the Black Sea.”^[191] Hitchcock writes, “Ancient history identifies biblical Gomer with the Akkadian Gi-mir-ra-a and the Armenian Gamir. Beginning in the eighth century BC, the Cimmerians occupied territory in what is now modern Turkey. Josephus noted that the Gomerites were identified with the Galatians who inhabited what today is central Turkey.”^[192]

Assessment: Gomer can be identified with modern-day Turkey.

What is Beth-togarmath? Beth means “house” in Hebrew. Alexander identifies Beth-togarmath as “possibly the ancient Til-garimmu southeast of the Black Sea.”^[193] Hitchcock writes, “Ancient Togarmah was also known as Til-garamu (Assyrian) or Tegarma (Hittite), and its territory is in modern Turkey, north of Israel. Again, Turkey is identified as part of this group of nations that attack Israel to challenge the group of ten.”^[194] Allen identifies Beth-togarmath as the people of Armenia—the neighbors of Turkey.^[195]

Assessment: Beth-togarmath can be identified with the people of Armenia or Turkey.

Ezekiel does not give an exhaustive list of nations. He writes that there will be “many peoples with you” (Ezek. 38:6). Thus other unnamed nations are surely in view as well.

When will this battle take place?

Israel will be in a state of peace and security when this battle occurs (Ezek. 38:8, 11). Ezekiel predicts that multiple nations will all invade Israel including Russia, Iran, Sudan, and many others (Ezek. 38:16). God will supernaturally rescue the nation of Israel with an earthquake and fire from heaven, and the number of casualties will be so massive that it will take seven months to bury the bodies (Ezek. 39:11-12). Surely we would’ve noticed if this battle had already occurred! Furthermore, since Ezekiel wrote this, Israel has never felt the security to go defenseless in her own land as Ezekiel 38:11 suggests. Thus instead of looking into the past for a fulfillment, Ezekiel places this event “after many days” (Ezek. 38:8) and “in the last days” (Ezek. 38:16), expressions which refer to the end of history. Yet it isn’t exactly certain when Armageddon will occur—even if we are sure it will happen sometime in the future. Several options have been given:^[196]

Before the rescue of the Church. If God destroys this invasion of Israel before the rescue of the Church, then this would explain how the Jewish people could rebuild their Temple over the Dome of the Rock. It would also explain why it takes seven years to burn the weapons after the battle (Ezek. 39:9).

After the rescue of the Church but before the Tribulation. This view explains how Israel could rebuild the Temple on the Dome of the Rock, as well as the destruction of the weapons for seven years (Ezek. 39:9). This view would also militarily castrate Russia and the Arabs, lifting Europe to the forefront of global politics.

Halfway through the Tribulation. This would align the events of the Tribulation with the northern aggressor of Daniel 11:40. It would also make sense of Israel living securely in the false peace of the Antichrist (Ezek. 38:8; cf. Dan. 9:27). This view has difficulty explaining why the weapons would be burned for seven years (Ezek. 39:9).

At the end of the Millennium. This would make sense of John’s statement that Gog and Magog will invade Israel at the end of the Millennium (Rev. 20:7-9). Yet it doesn’t fit with the chronology of Ezekiel’s prophecy: Ezekiel pictures this battle after the regathering of Israel (Ezek. 37) but before the Temple sacrifices in the Millennium (Ezek. 40-48). Of course, John states that there will be “no temple” in the New Heaven and Earth (Rev. 21:22). Moreover, it seems strange to have the Jewish people spending seven months burying all of the dead bodies (Ezek. 39:12) and seven years burning all of the weapons (Ezek. 39:9), if Christ will immediately return to raise them for judgment.

Ezekiel states that Gog will only come from “the remote parts of the north” (Ezek. 38:15; 39:2), while John writes that Gog and Magog will come from “the four corners of the earth” (Rev. 20:8). Thus John and Ezekiel may be seeing two separate events—not one. Rhodes writes, “The apostle John may have been using the terms Gog and Magog as a shorthand metaphor, just as we do today. For example, the name Wall Street is now a metaphor for the stock market. Likewise, in New Testament times, terms like Corinthian and Nazarene became metaphors for people with less-than-desirable qualities. When John used the terms Gog and Magog in Revelation 20:7-10, his readers no doubt immediately drew the right connection and understood that this invasion at the end of the millennium would be similar to what Ezekiel described—a confederation of nations will attack Israel but will not succeed.”^[197]

Why do they use ancient weapons, if this is a future battle?

Ezekiel foresees that the battle of Armageddon will be fought with “horses” (Ezek. 38:4, 15), “swords” (Ezek. 38:4, 21; 39:23), “bows and arrows” (Ezek. 39:9, 3), and “war clubs and spears” (Ezek. 39:9). If this battle occurs in the future, why would Ezekiel see such ancient weapons and warfare?

Some futurists argue it’s possible that humanity could revert to ancient weapons at this time. After the world sees such tragic destruction and despair, we may not have access to the type of weapons we have today. After all, as Albert Einstein once said, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”^[198] Because this battle will be fought over mountainous terrain, perhaps these armies would prefer horses to tanks.

Another option is that Ezekiel could be using ancient imagery for a future event. Even today, a modern general might use the expression, “Send in the cavalry” or “They’re going to die by the sword.” Similarly, Hebrew words were used more for their function, rather than their definition. Chuck Missler states that these words could be a case of synecdoche, whereby the specific term can be used in the general sense or vice-versa. A snake is literally a “hisser” and a horse is literally a “leaper.”^[199] Thus these words may have more of a semantic range that might include modernized weapons. Other Dispensationalists have criticized this view.^[200]

A third option rests in the possibility that Ezekiel is only mentioning some of the weapons, but not all of them. Ezekiel never states that they will only use primitive weapons; modernized weapons might be in view which he simply fails to mention. In Ezekiel 38:9, the prophet uses the language of simile to describe this army: “You will come like a storm; you will be like a cloud covering the land, you and all your troops, and many peoples with you.” Naturally, “storms” and “clouds” come from up above, so perhaps aerial warfare could be in view.

In the end, this remains a difficulty. Walvoord rightly concludes, “The final answer to explain the weapons is unknown.”^[201]

The Future Temple (Chs. 40-48)

Ezekiel 40

For a thorough explanation of how premillennial and amillennial interpreters understand Ezekiel’s future temple, see Endless Hope or Hopeless End (2016), pp. 145-151.

(Ezek. 40-48) Amillennialists hold that the millennium cannot be literal, because it demands animal sacrifice. Doesn’t this contradict the argument from Hebrews that Christ died once-for-all (Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 26)?

Summary: After this fiery battle, there will be a massive Temple restored. There are many measurements taken of this Temple—very specific. There were animal sacrifices performed here (v.41). There are priests that serve in the Temple (vv.45-46).

(40:1) This vision dates to 573 BC, and it would’ve occurred four days before the Passover.^[202]

(40:2) Ezekiel was viewing the city of Jerusalem to the south, but we are not sure which mountain he was standing on.^[203]

(40:3-4) This angel looked like a statue of bronze—only he was moving and talking. He had a “measuring rod” which fits with other apocalyptic visions (Rev. 11:1; 21:15).

40:5-42:20 (The millennial temple)

Regarding the details of this temple, Alexander writes, “These plans and specific dimensions are accurate enough to enable plans to be drawn and models to be constructed with a fair degree of accuracy.”^[204]

(40:5) A “cubit” was 18 inches (from elbow to middle finger), a “handbreadth” was ~3 inches, and a “rod” was ~10.5 feet.^[205]

(40:6-16) This is the eastern portion of the Temple (v.6). The outer gate was 10 cubits wide (v.11) and 6 cubits deep (v.6). This resembles Solomon’s gate system.^[206] In the gate, there were three alcoves (v.7, 10, 12). It was decorated with palm trees.

The gate system was 25 cubits wide and 50 cubits long (v.13, 15).

(40:17-19) The pavement stretched a hundred cubits, and facing the pavement, we see a number of rooms.

(40:20-27) The northern and southern gates are identical to the eastern gate (vv.6-16).

The inner court

(40:28-37) The angel shows the inner court in a clockwise direction, starting with the southern gate. All of these porticoes faced outward. The dimension for these porticoes is slightly different from those on the outside.^[207]

(40:38-43) The burnt offerings were washed here (v.38). The northern gate had extra tables (v.42).

(40:44-46) Singers and priests would be in this temple—though it’s possible that the priests were the singers (1 Chron. 16:4-6; 23:5; 2 Chron. 29).

(40:47) This was a perfect 100 cubit square.

(40:48-49) The angel brought him to porch just outside the Temple.

Ezekiel 41 (The Holy Place)

(41:1-2) This is the Holy Place or inner temple.

(41:3-4) Ezekiel entered the “most holy place” or Holy of Holies.

(41:5-11) A six cubit foot wall surrounded the Temple. Close to the wall, were three stories of 30 rooms (90 rooms total). These looked like little apartments.

(41:12-26) To the west of the Temple, there was a separate building. It is massive (70 cubits wide and 90 cubits long), but we don’t know the function of this building (vv.13-15).^[208]

The inside walls were covered with palm trees and cherubim (vv.15-20).

There is a wooden altar inside the Temple (v.22). This is only three cubits high and two cubits squared. It is much smaller than the sacrificial altar (Ezek. 43:13-17). It might be an incense altar.^[209]

Ezekiel 42 (Outer court buildings)

(42:1-9) The northern building had three stories with rooms on the top floor.

(42:10-12) The southern building (not eastern building) is similar. The LXX says “south,” and this fits with verse 12 which repeats the word “south.”^[210]

(42:13-14) The priests would eat their food and change their clothes in these buildings.

(42:15-20) The temple complex was 500 rods squared. This is a huge area. Alexander writes, “Zechariah and other prophets demonstrate that the whole Palestinian topography will undergo geographical modifications at the beginning of the Millennium. No good reason appears to reject the term ‘rod’ in these verses.”^[211] This area separated the Temple from the everyday life.

Ezekiel 43 (The glory of God returns to the Temple)

(43:1-5) The imagery is the same as chapters 1 and 3, and the departing of God’s glory (Ezek. 8-10) is juxtaposed by God’s returning to his Temple. Those who deny the Third Temple have great difficulty explaining how both visions can be so similar in nature, while one is literal (the First Temple) and one is figurative (the Third Temple).

(43:6-12) The divine interpretation is that this is a literal Temple, and God will remain with them “forever” (v.7). God even specified that it needed to be built exactly according to plan (v.11).

(43:13-17) The altar was placed in the front of the sanctuary. Alexander comments, “This millennial altar was very large: approximately thirty-one and one-half feet square at the base by approximately nineteen and one-quarter feet high!”^[212]

(43:18-27) The previous tabernacle and temple needed cleansed as well (Ex. 29:36-37; Lev. 8:14-17; 2 Chron. 7:9). The concept of “atonement” for the altar was “the idea of wiping away or cleansing, after which the altar would be holy (v.20b; cf. Lev 8:14-15).”^[213] Alexander connects God’s acceptance of the sacrifice (v.27) as connected with the Messiah’s earlier sacrifice.^[214] This could be in the sense that these sacrifices pointed retrospectively to the Cross, just as the Old Covenant pointed prospectively to the Cross.

Ezekiel 44 (The east gate and the Zadokite priests)

(44:1-2) The east gate would remain closed because God had entered here (Ezek. 43:1-4). Alexander writes, “This gate is not the ‘golden gate’ located in the old city of Jerusalem today, because the dimensions of the two temple areas are vastly different. The structures of the current ‘temple area’ will not exist in the millennial period.”^[215]

(44:3) The word “prince” (nāśîʾ) is better translated “leader.”^[216] This can’t refer to Jesus, because he makes a sin offering for himself (Ezek. 45:22) and has physical children (Ezek. 46:16). This figure is simply unknown.^[217] We won’t know who this man is until the millennial kingdom.

(44:4-5) God revealed his glory for Ezekiel again, and once again, he told him to record the measurements accurately.

(44:6-9) The priests needed to descend from Aaron. Otherwise, they were supposed to be put to death (Num. 3:10).

(44:10-14) The priests would still serve, but in a limited capacity because of their sin of idolatry.

(44:15-16) Solomon originally appointed the descendants of Zadok to serve in the Temple (1 Sam. 2:26-35). This priestly line had remained faithful, so they will serve in this era.

(44:17-18) The priests will wear linen—rather than wool—to prevent sweating.

(44:19) Ceremonial defilement could be spread, and so could ceremonial holiness (Ex. 29:37; 30:29; Lev. 6:27).

(44:20-22) These regulations for the priest were similar to the Mosaic Covenant: hair regulation (Lev. 21:6), drinking (Lev. 10:9), and marrying a widow or divorced woman (Lev. 21:7, 14).[218]

(44:23-24) The priests will teach and serve as judges in this era.

(44:25-27) In the Mosaic Covenant, the priests couldn’t become unclean in this way (Lev. 21:1-3; Num. 19:11-19).

(44:28-31) By giving to the priests, the people were giving to God. This would bring blessing into their lives.

Ezekiel 45 (The leader’s role in the Millennium)

(45:1-8) The measurement is rods—not cubits.^[219]

(45:9-12) The people should be righteous in their business dealings.

(45:13-17) Alexander writes, “These rituals of atonement were commemorative of the complete and finished work of Christ for sin through the sacrifice of himself. They were in no way efficacious. They were picture-lessons and reminders to the people of their Messiah’s marvelous saving work.”^[220]

(45:18-20) The millennial leader would cleanse the Temple once a year.

(45:21-25) Alexander writes, “These procedures followed closely those of the Mosaic system.”^[221]

Ezekiel 46 (Sacrifices)

(46:1-8) The “prince” or “leader” would lead the freewill sacrifices and worship on the Sabbath day by opening up the east gate.

(46:9-12) The people came through one gate and left through the other. Alexander comments that “this was the first instance of others besides the priests entering the inner court.”^[222] He gave his freewill offerings here.

(46:13-15) The Mosaic Covenant would offer the sacrifice every morning and evening. This is only in the mornings.

(46:16-18) Personal property still existed. The “prince” would pass down his real estate to his sons, but he could not take away land from any others.

(46:19-24) There were four spacious kitchens that the priests would use to make their sacrifices.

Ezekiel 47 (National boundaries)

(47:1-12) The longer the river stretched, the deeper the river became. It eventually reached and revitalized the Dead Sea (vv.8-9). The purpose of the river was to bring life. This river is similar to the one described in Revelation 22:1-2. Alexander points out a few dissimilarities: “Ezekiel saw the river issuing from the temple, whereas John saw the river coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb (a temple not existing according to Rev 21:22). The river in Revelation 22:2 also flowed down the city’s street, which seems difficult, but not impossible, in the Ezekiel account.”^[223]

(47:13-14) The boundaries for the land would return to each of the tribes.

(47:15-20) The national boundaries were similar to ancient Israel (Num. 34:3-12).

(47:21-23) The people were to be kind and welcoming to foreigners (Lev. 19:34).

Ezekiel 48 (The new Jerusalem)

(48:1-7) The twelve tribes are listed. The more faithful were located in the southern kingdom (e.g. Judah and Benjamin).^[224]

(48:8-14) The priestly land surrounded the sanctuary.

(48:15-20) The entire real estate would be 25,000 rods (not cubits) of land.

(48:21-22) The land outside belonged to the “prince” or leader.

(48:23-29) This describes the land allotments for the southern tribes.

(48:30-34) The “city” mentioned most likely refers to Jerusalem (Zech. 14:8).^[225] The twelve gates are named after the twelve tribes (cf. Rev. 21:12-13). The city is square, which is similar to the (cubed) city of Revelation (Rev. 21:16). Alexander comments, “If the two are not identical, they certainly demonstrate that the characteristics of the Millennium and those of the eternal state are similar.”^[226]

(48:35) The final title of the city is a powerful ending to the book. Alexander writes, “Ezekiel concluded his great prophecy by giving the city a name, a name that the city would have from that day forward: ‘The Lord is there’ (YHWH šāmmāh). The Lord would reside forever with his people. Never again would they be separated from him through discipline. Forever Israel would live as God’s people and he as their God! This name would characterize God’s city just as in Hebrew thought any new name gave a new character to its recipient.”^[227]

^[1] Block, D. I. (1997). The Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24 (p. 9). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

[2] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 396.

[3] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 394.

^[4] Archer, Gleason. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (3rd. Ed.). Chicago: Moody Press. 1994. 410.

[5] S. R. Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 9th ed. (Edinburgh: T& T Clark, 1913), 279. Cited in Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 395.

^[6] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 740). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[7] Taylor, J. B. (1969). Ezekiel: an Introduction and commentary (Vol. 22, p. 17). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

^[8] Taylor, J. B. (1969). Ezekiel: an Introduction and commentary (Vol. 22, p. 18). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

^[9] Taylor, J. B. (1969). Ezekiel: an Introduction and commentary (Vol. 22, p. 18). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

[10] C. C. Torrey, Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1930).

[11] For example, see C. G. Howie, The Date and Composition of Ezekiel (Philadelphia: SBL, 1950); G. Fohrer, Die Hauptprobleme des Buches Ezechiel (Berlin: Albel Topelmann, 1952). W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel, Hermeneia, 2 vols. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1979, 1983).

[12] Newman, Robert C. The Evidence of Prophecy: Fulfilled Prediction as a Testimony to the Truth of Christianity. Hatfield, PA: Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute, 1988. 21.

[13] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 396.

[14] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 396.

[15] Bab. Shabbath 13b. Cited in Roger T. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1986), 284.

[16] Merrill, Eugene H., Mark F. Rooker, and Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word: An Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2011), 404.

[17] Roger Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1986), 318.

^[18] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 754). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[19] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 754). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[20] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 757). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[21] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 757). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[22] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 760). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[23] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 761). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[24] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 761). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[25] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 761). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[26] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 764). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[27] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 766). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[28] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 767). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[29] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 769). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[30] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 769). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[31] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 770). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[32] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 770). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[33] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 771). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[34] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 774). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[35] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 775). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[36] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 776). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[37] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 777). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[38] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 778). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[39] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 781). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[40] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 781). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[41] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 782). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[42] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 783). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[43] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 783). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[44] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 783). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[45] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 784). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[46] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 785). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[47] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 788). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[48] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 790). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[49] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 791). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[50] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 793). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[51] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 794). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[52] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 797). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[53] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 797). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[54] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 797). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[55] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 799). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[56] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 801). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[57] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 803). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[58] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 805). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[59] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 808). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[60] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 810). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[61] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 810). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[62] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 811). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[63] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 813). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[64] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 814). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[65] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 816). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[66] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 820). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[67] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 822). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[68] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 822). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[69] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 823). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[70] Alexander writes, “This principle of the Decalogue teaches that children would be affected by their father’s sin. Parents model for their children. The sinful behavior of parents is readily followed by their children. Regrettably, therefore, children frequently found themselves practicing the same sinful acts as their father. Likewise, they must accept the same just punishment for such actions. However, each child is still individually responsible. He can abort the ‘sin-punishment-inheritance’ progression at any time. But he must repent and do what is right.” Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 823). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[71] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 824). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[72] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 828). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[73] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 830). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[74] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 830). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[75] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 830). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[76] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 831). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[77] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 832). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[78] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 832). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[79] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 836). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[80] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 838). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[81] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 842). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[82] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 843). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[83] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 844). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[84] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 844). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[85] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 845). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[86] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 847). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[87] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 851). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[88] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 851). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[89] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 851). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[90] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 852). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[91] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 854). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[92] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 854). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[93] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 854). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[94] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 857). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[95] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 859). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[96] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 860). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[97] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 860). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[98] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 862). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[99] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 862). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[100] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 865). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[101] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 866). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[102] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 866). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[103] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 866). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[104] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 867). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[105] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 868). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[106] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 869). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[107] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 870). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[108] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 870). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[109] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 870). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[110] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 870). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[111] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 875). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[112] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 875). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[113] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 876). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[114] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 878). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[115] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 888). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[116] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 891). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[117] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 891). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[118] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 891). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[119] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 891). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[120] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 893). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[121] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 893). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[122] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 897). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[123] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 899). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[124] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 899). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[125] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 900). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[126] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 901). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[127] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 902). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[128] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 903). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[129] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 905). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[130] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 905). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[131] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 910). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[132] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 911). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[133] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, pp. 911-912). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[134] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 914). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[135] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 914). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[136] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 919). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[137] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 921). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[138] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 922). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[139] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 923). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[140] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 924). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[141] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 925). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[142] Alexander lists six possible solutions, but concludes, “None of the proposed solutions have sufficient support to warrant their acceptance as the identity of the term ‘Gog.’” Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 929.

^[143] Leslie Allen, Ezekiel 20-48. Vol. 29. (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 204-205.

[144] Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: 25-48, 433.

[145] Edwin Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier: Invading Hordes from the Russian Steppes (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1982), 24.

[146] Iain Duguid, The NIV Application Commentary: Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), 447.

[147] The king of Lydia (Candaules) had Gyges (his general) stare at his wife naked to show off her beauty. As revenge, the Queen had Gyges kill her husband by hiding in the same place he viewed her nakedness. See Herodotus, Histories. 1.8-13.

[148] Iain Duguid, The NIV Application Commentary: Ezekiel, 447.

[149] Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 1.6.1.

^[150] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 929.

[151] Edwin Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier, 64.

[152] David E. Garland (et al.), Jeremiah-Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 853.

[153] For proponents of this adjectival usage, see David E. Garland (et al.), Jeremiah-Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 854. Block favors seeing Rosh as a “common noun” and an appositional usage. See Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: 25-48, 435.

[154] For an exhaustive treatment of the subject, see James Price. “Rosh: An Ancient Land Known to Ezekiel.” Grace Theological Journal, 6.1 (1985). 67-89. See also C. F. Keil, Ezekiel, Daniel, Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982), 159-160.

[155] Clyde E. Billington, Jr. “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy,” (Part One), Michigan Theological Journal 3:1 (Spring 1992). 61.

[156] Friedrich Heinrich Wilhelm Gesenius, Thesaurus Linguae Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti (Lipsiae: Sumtibus Typisque, Fr. Chr. Guil. Vogelii, 1835), vol. III, p. 1253. Cited in Clyde E. Billington, Jr. “The Rosh People” 62.

[157] Clyde E. Billington, Jr. “The Rosh People” 56.

[158] Clyde E. Billington, Jr. “The Rosh People” 60.

[159] Clyde E. Billington, Jr. “The Rosh People” 60.

[160] Edwin Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier, 20.

[161] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” Michigan Theological Journal 3:2 (Fall 1992). 143-145.

[162] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 145.

[163] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 146.

[164] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 153.

[165] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 170.

[166] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 170.

[167] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 170.

[168] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 172.

[169] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Three),” Michigan Theological Journal 4:1 (Spring 1993). 48.

[170] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Three),” 54-55.

[171] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 173.

[172] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 167.

[173] Clyde E. Billington, Jr., “The Rosh People in History and Prophecy (Part Two),” 153.

^[174] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 930.

[175] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 298.

^[176] Leslie Allen, Ezekiel 20-48. Vol. 29. (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 204.

^[177] John G. Gammie and Paul Achtemeier, Harper’s Bible dictionary (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 629.

^[178] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 930.

[179] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 298.

^[180] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 931.

[181] Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: 25-48, 439.

[182] David E. Garland (et al.), Jeremiah-Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 855.

[183] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 298.

[184] David E. Garland (et al.), Jeremiah-Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 855. See also Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: 25-48, 439.

[185] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 298.

^[186] Leslie Allen, Ezekiel 20-48, 205.

^[187] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 931.

[188] Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel: 25-48, 439.

[189] Yamauchi writes, “Biblical Gomer (Gen. 10:2-3; Ezek. 38:6) may be associated with the invading tribe from Russia known in nonbiblical sources as the Cimmerians.” Edwin Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier, 49.

[190] David E. Garland (et al.), Jeremiah-Ezekiel (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 855.

[191] See Homer, Odyssey, 11.13-19. Cited in Edwin Yamauchi, Foes from the Northern Frontier, 49.

[192] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 299.

^[193] Ralph Alexander. Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 931.

[194] Mark Hitchcock, The End: A Complete Overview of Bible Prophecy and the End of Days, 299.

^[195] Leslie Allen, Ezekiel 20-48, 205.

[196] Rhodes shows seven different views on when event will occur. See Chapter Seven, “Can We Know When the Ezekiel Invasion Will Occur?” Ron Rhodes, The 8 Great Debates of Bible Prophecy (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2014), 69-83.

[197] Ron Rhodes, The 8 Great Debates of Bible Prophecy (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2014), 81.

[198] Albert Einstein in an interview with Alfred Werner. Liberal Judaism 16 (April-May, 1949), 12. Cited in Albert Einstein and Alice Calaprice, The New Quotable Einstein (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2005), 173.

[199] Chuck Missler, The Magog Invasion (Palos Verdas, CA: Western Front, 1995), 174.

[200] See Ice, Thomas. “Ezekiel 38-39: Part VIII.”

[201] John Walvoord, Every Prophecy in the Bible: Clear Expectations for Uncertain Times (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook Publications, 2011), 188.

^[202] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 953). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[203] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 953). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[204] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 954). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[205] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 955). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[206] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 956). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[207] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 959). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[208] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 964). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[209] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 964). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[210] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 967). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[211] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 968). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[212] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 971). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[213] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 973). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[214] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 973). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[215] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 974). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[216] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 974). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[217] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 974). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

[218] Of course, this restriction was only for the high priest in the Mosaic Covenant. Here, it is ascribed to all priests in the Millennium.

^[219] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 981). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[220] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 983). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[221] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 986). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[222] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 987). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[223] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 990). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[224] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 993). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[225] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 996). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[226] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 996). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

^[227] Alexander, R. H. (1986). Ezekiel. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel (Vol. 6, p. 996). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.